Good evening. Good evening everyone. I call this meeting of the Prior Lake Savage Area Schools Board of Education to order. Welcome to everyone joining us in person and online. Uh please rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance as you're able.
I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right, we have all board members are
present this evening. Our first um agenda item is Laker Pride. I'll turn it over to Dr. Thomas. >> Thank you, Chair Bullan. Board directors, um this evening we've got one
um recognition. I would like to um congratulate Mr. our principal Joe Kabushek, principal of Hidden Oaks Middle School and Twin Oaks Middle School. I'm being named the 2025 2026 administrator of the year by the Minnesota Association of School Office
Professionals. This recognition reflects his leadership and his service to both partner middle schools um to um service to both partner middle schools and Prior Lake Savage Area Schools. And I just personally want to thank him for his leadership um at the campus. I know that
um this uh managing of the campuses is no easy task, but I know that you've got a really talented team and staff and and and folks to support you as well. And I just want to say congratulations to you. Um welld deserved and uh we appreciate
you a lot. Thanks, Principal K. >> Thank you. >> Such a welldeserved honor for Principal Kabuchek. All right. Next up is the superintendence report and I will invite
Dr. Thomas to do that. Yeah, I just briefly um want to say congratulations to all of our seniors who uh graduated last week. And uh I really want to um thank our community for their patience and understanding as we uh were doing
other duties as a sign tracking weather and uh making sure that everything went off without a hitch. And uh uh we were really lucky by calling it by moving it up by 1 hour because as soon as we were done loading tables, the skies opened up. So, um, really want to thank all the
team, Matt Krennic, uh, Dan Powers, uh, the building admin team. It was a beautiful event and, uh, really well done, even with some of the additional measures of support that we had there. Um, it was really well done. So, thank you. Um, and congratulations to our seniors and we wish you well as you um,
go off into your next chapter. And um speaking of going off into the next chapter, I just want to also say thank you so much to the Prior Lake School Board and the uh community of Prior Lake. Um tonight will be my last board meeting um with the district and just want to say how grateful and humble it's
been to serve as the superintendent here in Prior Lake Savage Area Schools and uh my heart um is is mixed. It's it's a really tough um spa space to be, but uh I know that we've got great leadership uh great schools uh staff and a great
community who is ready to take uh the next chapter here for the Prior Lake Savage area schools. So, thank you all for being a dynamic board. As I've shared u on multiple occasions, being a board member in 2026 is no easy task and I know that uh you all are putting in
your heart and soul equally um to support uh the work here in the district. So, thank you for for your support there. And um my hope goes out to um our overall our community. We know we've had uh some um great successes and celebrations in our community. We also
have had our share of challenges and we know that we'll continue to work through some of those. And um you know, this is something that I just want to implore our community and our staff um that we are always better together. And the staff hear me say all the time, ask questions, push back, and challenge me.
It keeps me grounded, keeps me humbled, and allows me to grow. And um and we can do that in ways that um are not disagreeable. And um I I just really want to emphasize the unity aspect of our of our Strap plan. That's what it's going to take to really um continually
move uh the work that we have before us. So, thank you all and uh thank you to the community for um allowing this opportunity. >> Oh, thank you, Dr. Thomas. Thank you. Um I'll I'll take one second just to say um
it has been an honor to serve with you and learn with you. Um so thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you for your service to this district. Um okay, next up we have no proclamations at this time. Uh so then we will move to open
forum. Um, speakers are asked to limit their comments to three minutes and please speak in the manner in which you prefer to be spoken to. Um, first speaker tonight on the levy amount is Nicole Clckner. >> Hi, thank you. I am Nicole Clener. I'm a
district parent and voter. Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm here to express my strong concern regarding the possibility of approving one of the smaller levy amounts. Given the ongoing financial challenges facing our district, anything less further risks further eroding the quality of
education our students receive. We are already seeing the real impact of budget shortfalls. Staff reductions, larger class sizes, program cuts, and even school closures are no longer hypothetical possibilities. They're happening now. These decisions affect students every day and have lasting
impacts on families and our community as a whole. I understand that levy decisions are difficult and require balancing many viewpoints. However, underfunding our schools comes with consequences that are far more costly in the long run. Strong schools are one of the most important investments a
community can make. They support student success, attract families, strengthen property values, and contribute to the overall health of our community. As elected leaders, you have a responsibility to educate the entire community about the realities facing our district. That means helping residents
understand not only the challenges we face today, but also the consequences of the choices before us. Leadership requires more than advocacy. It requires honest communication and a commitment to ensuring the public has the information necessary to make informed decisions.
For that reason, I urge you to support one of the larger levy amounts. Anything below that feels disingenuous and it's asking the community to contribute additional resources without providing the level of investment necessary to stabilize and strengthen our schools. Our students, staff, and community
deserve transparency, leadership, and a plan that addresses the true scope of the district's financial needs. Thank you for your time, your service, and your consideration. >> Thank you. All right, our next uh next speaker on
levy question and thoughts uh Rick Stoley. >> Thank you very much. I will do my best to get done in three minutes. And last time I was here, wasn't the room reversed? >> Nope, it was like this. >> Okay, I'm just trying to get my bearings here. I'm like I'm not losing my mind.
So, good evening, chair, board members, Superintendent Thomas. Again, my name is Rick Storyley. I live in Credit River, and I'm here tonight as a resident, a taxpayer, a community member who cares deeply about our schools, our students, our teachers, and the long-term strength of this district. I want to be clear at the start, I do support strong public
schools. I support great teachers. I I support safe classrooms and support investing in students when the money is tied directly to better academic outcomes. But I do not support asking homeowners for more money without full transparency, stronger accountability, and a clear commitment to getting the
district focused back on the basics. So over the last several years, the community has been told the district needs more funding. But when we look at the numbers, revenue has already gone up. According to the information I reviewed, district revenue increased 12% during Superintendent Thomas' tenure. And because enrollment declined, revenue
per student increased 15%. At the same time, expenditures increased 17%, spending per student then increased 20 and the general fund balance declined by about 7.8 million or 36%. So this is not a small concern. It's a pattern of spending more while reserves go down.
Now the question taxpayers have a right to ask is simple. What did we get for the additional spending? Well, unfortunately academic results were not where they should be. MCA results remain disappointing. The information I reviewed shows about all school spending at at just under 60%.
Math is just under 58% in 2025 and that's below the 2021 2022 levels. So, it should concern every person in this room. I'm not here to attack teachers and I don't think teachers are the problem, but leadership priorities matter and budget decisions matter and
board oversightes matter. So for too long the district has spent money and energy on political and ideological priorities that have not improved reading, math, science, discipline, or classroom performance. Every student should be treated with dignity and respect. That should never be in question. But the mission of a school
district is not activism. It's education. Parents and taxpayers want academic excellence, transparency, fiscal discipline in classrooms focused on learning. So it leads me to the levy being discussed. The public has repeatedly heard the number 3.8 8 million per year or 38 million over 10
years. The proposed ballot language does not create a fixed 3.8 million uh annual cap. It uses a fixed factor roughly 3.4% multiplied by the district's net tax capacity each year. So it means the factor stays the same but the amount collected can rise as net tax capacity
rises. And that is the part taxpayers need to clearly understand. No one can guarantee that net tax capacity will increase at the same rate it did over the past decade. Maybe it's going to be lower, maybe it's going to be higher. But it's not unreasonable to present this as if net tax capacity will
remain flat for the next 10 years. If property values and net tax capacity increase, then the amount collected by the levy increases too. So the real question is not whether the 3.4 27% factor changes. The real question is how much money will taxpayers actually pay
over the full 10 years. So, of course, it matters to every community uh every community prior like Savage Credit versus Spring Lake Township uh and every other community in the district. So, the district's no tax increase quote unquote message may be technically true in the first year
because the existing debt is falling off. But unless the net tax capacity stays flat or declines, the message becomes incomplete after year 1. So, taxpayers may still pay more over time because the levy grows with the tax base. So the board's responsibility is
to the public in my opinion and the public deserves plain English real world cost projections before being asked to vote. Um the chart showing that the 3.4 uh7% uh factor is the same for 10 years are not enough. Taxpayers myself really don't care whether the factor changes.
They care whether the levy will actually cost them. What is my monthly net ask? So I'm asking this board to be more transparent and direct. Before putting the question on the ballot, show the community multiple 10-year scenarios. What would the levy be? Say if it's 0%, it tax capa capacity grows by 0% or 3%
or 5% or 7% or 7.8% as it has in the past. Show the estimated impact on homeowners in each scenario. Clearly state that the 38 million figure is not a guaranteed maximum if the levy is based on net tax capacity each year. I don't think that's too much to ask. It's
basic transparency. And I'll close with one final point about leadership and direction. And Dr. Thomas, I know you're leaving. Congratulations on your new position. I attended the finance uh symposium that you put on and you someone asked you about can we get more open enrollment students and your answer
was well we're all just shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic. I know that we can't levy ourselves out of this locally. I know there's a lot of issues with the state unfanded mandates, etc., etc. However, I think the statement is very revealing in that if we view open
enrollment as rearranging a deck chairs and a Titanic, then taxpayers need to know what the real plan is. So, in other words, how will this keep district families here? How will it attract families back? How will it rebuild trust, improve academics, restore
financial discipline, and make plsas a district families are proud to choose? So the voters rejected the last referendum and there's a whole lot of conjecture why that was. I don't think it had anything to do with this community being anti-school. In fact, I think it's the opposite. I think it dis it means that people just want more
transparency. They want trust restored. They want fiscal responsibility. They want better results. So my message tonight is simple. Respect the taxpayers. Focus on academics. Be honest about real long-term cost. Show the public the full 10-year impact. Spend within your means. And give this community a levy proposal that's
transparent. It's disciplined and it's worthy of trust. So, thank you very much. Uh, and Dr. Thomas, in the words of Napoleon Dynamite, may all your wildest dreams come true. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> All right. >> Yep, that's everyone. Okay. Next up is the approval um of the agenda. Are there any proposed changes to the agenda? Hearing none, um I'll entertain an a
motion to approve the agenda. Um I'm going to say as presented with one small change. Um item number 18, uh we are not having closed meeting tonight. Okay. Um, so I'll entertain a
motion to accept the agenda less the open or the sorry the closed meeting. >> I made >> uh second >> director Olad and then um Director France. All in favor say I. >> I opposed.
>> That passes 70. All right. Um next up is the consent consent agenda. Uh the consent agenda consists of routine items that have been reviewed in advance by the board and will be
considered under one motion. Um those items include financials, uh purchase orders over $25,000, the monthly financial report, cash flow report, approval of schoolboard minutes, personnel items,
um which include reassignments and district retirements. Uh and then um and that's it. Okay. So, does any board member have anything that they wish to remove from the consent agenda? >> Okay. Hi, here
>> I actually have a question. Is G supposed to be under consent or is that supposed to be a separate item? The UCOM annual report. >> Consent. >> Okay. Thank you. Just making sure. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, um I will entertain a motion uh to
accept the consent agenda. by Director Mason. Second, >> and a second by Director Smith. All in favor say I. >> Oppose say nay. >> That passes 70. Okay, moving right along.
Uh, next up is um item number 11 on our agenda, which is the resolution for acceptance of gifts. Let me get there. Okay. Um, I will I will now uh make a
motion to approve the resolution for acceptance of gifts. Can I get a second for that? >> By Director Johnson. Um this the okay Prior Lake Savage Area Schools is
fortunate to benefit from the generosity of our community partners, families, and supporters. On behalf of the board, I'd like to express our sincere gratitude to those who have chosen to invest in our students, staff, and schools through the following contributions. We have several
tonight. Um the first one is Laker Pro promotions Tracy Fleming in the amount of $277.75 for Everybody's Playground. The next one is Glendel PTC in the amount of 45,288 for Everybody's Playground. Next up is
the Laker Educational Foundation in the amount of $30,636 for Everybody's Playground. Next is Jeff Pond PTC in the amount of $54,17152 for Everybody's Playground. The
Burnsville Savage Lions Club in the amount of $40,000 for Everybody's Playground. Uh Prior Lake Lions Club in the amount of $1,000. And that is for the Educator of Excellence Award. Then the Prior Lake Lions Club for the
amount of $1,700 for honor cords and scholarships. Uh then we have the Prior Lake SA Savage Optimist uh for $1,000 for the Educator of Excellence Award. Uh Prior Lake
Savage Optimist Club for in the amount of $1,000 for the Powow PA system. Then we have the Laker Educational Foundation in the amount of $1,500 for Powow. Um then we have Twin Oaks Middle School
PTC in the amount of $21,041 for the Twin Oaks Middle School fund run event um and teacher supplies. Then last but not least is the Prior Lake VFW post uh 6208 in the amount of $1,000
uh for the middle school honor band memorial day parade transportation. Um this item requires a roll call vote. Um and so with a motion and a second on the table.
Uh I'll start with you. Director Smith >> I. >> Uh Director France >> I. Director Olstead >> I. >> Director Mason >> I. >> Director Johnson >> I. >> And Director Atinson. >> I That motion carries 70. Oh, and I Amy
Bullion I. That motion carries 70. Uh, thank you again to our donors for their generosity and commitment to the success of our students. All right, moving on to the next agenda item is personnel items. We have three action
items tonight and I will entertain a motion for item A, the interim executive director of academic services. So made that is made by Director Atinson. >> Second >> and a second by Director Johnson. Um,
and is there any uh discussion or questions for Director Corn? Director Cawthorne, do you have anything that you want to present on that? >> Yeah. >> Great. Thank you. Good evening, Chair Bullion and board director, Superintendent Thomas. In front of you, you have a administrative staffing
change take effect July 1st. Uh, the following administrative changes are being recommended uh to be effective July 1st of 2026. And any financial implications have been reviewed by Lisa Ryder, executive director of business services. This staffing change is for the interim executive director of academic services. And it's to move Dr.
Carolyn Warner from principal and special assignment assistant director of academic service to interim executive director of academic services effective July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2027. It's a costneutral to fill Dr. Tim Anderson's resignation. And we are excited and looking forward to uh Dr.
Warner and uh gratefully uh welcome her to her new role. >> Yes. Thank you. Is Dr. Dr. Warner and she's not I don't see her. >> So, thank you and congratulations to Dr. Warner. Um,
next up on the personal >> need a vote. >> You'll need a vote on that. >> Sorry. Let's vote. >> All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Opposed say nay. That passes 70. Thank you.
Okay. Next personnel item is child nutrition services work agreement. I will I will um ask for a motion and a second on that. >> So >> by director Smith and director Johnson and then I'll turn it over to you
Director Catherine. >> Great. Thank you again. Thank you board. Uh once again in front of you you have uh the two-year work agreement for our child nutrition contract for the years of 2026 through 2028. And it's my recommendation that the proposed terms and conditions between the school board and the employees represented below are
approved. Some of the highlights in our child nutrition group uh for both years we uh were able to do a 4% uh health insurance allowance increase as well as on the dental insurance as well. Uh salary schedule enhancements uh both
2.25% in steps in both 24 um excuse me uh 2627 and 2728. And then uh we were able to increase the certification pay in uh levels 2, 3, and 4. We added longevity for years 10 through 14 at 25 cents an hour. Uh we
increased their clothing allowance to $200 for full-time employees and 125 for part-time employees. Um and then we had an unpaid uh memorandum of understanding and we were we put that into contract language and then there was some other formatting language updates. The total compounded percentage increase over the
base year equates to the MSBA percentage of 4.039%. And I just want to thank the child nutrition team that met with the district team. Uh they were phenomenal and awesome to work with and we were able to do this in two meetings. >> Well,
any questions or discussion board members? Okay. Hearing none, we'll vote. All in favor say I. I. Oppos say nay. That passes 70. All right. Now I will entertain a motion and a second for the third personnel
item uh which is the operations agreement. Do I have a motion? >> So made >> by Director France. >> Second and a second by Director Olstead. Uh Director Catherine. >> Yes. Thank you. Once again in front of you you have the two-year work agreement
for our custodial maintenance contract for the years of 2026 through 2028. And it's my recommendation that the proposed terms and conditions between the school board and the employees represented below are approved. Once again, on the health insurance, we were able to increase the health insurance allowance by 4% each year, as well as the dental
insurance, the salary schedule, and for 2627 had a 1.5% plus steps. And then 2728 was 2.75% plus steps. We added a longevity schedule for this group starting for employees after 5 years of service. Uh we increased the leads
stipend uh to $300 and we moved the high school nightly from category B to a category C. And we did a costneutral uniform allowance uh shift uh where we went from a flat amount to allow our to allow the staff some flexibility to kind of pick what they need for replacements
and uniforms instead of just mandating certain things. And once again it was a costneutral um suggestion that we were able to implement and then once again some formatting and language changes. The total compound percentage for this work agreement increase over the base year equates to the MSBA percentage of 5.08%.
And the same thing, I'd like to thank the maintenance and custodial group that met with the district. Uh once again, phenomenal group of people to work with and we were able to do this in two meetings as well. >> Any questions for Director Corn?
Hearing none, let's vote. All in favor say I. I. >> Oppose say nay. That passes 70. Okay. Uh there is no unfinished business on tonight's agenda. So we will move to new business. Uh the first item um I
will invite Dr. Thomas to present on the annual compliance vote for American Indian Education. Uh this is an information item only. >> Yes, Dr. Thomas. >> Yep. Thank you, Chair Bull and board directors. Uh this evening, Ashley Town
from Apac will be joining us to um if she's here yet. Not yet. Okay. Um well um I will uh just share that um uh you you have the the letter of con uh non-concurrence this year
outlining some of the areas um that they feel would be great to continue to focus on um for next year as we um take more steps towards uh being concurrent with APAC. Um and uh they've also noted that we've had some transition uh with
leadership uh u that's been out on leave this year that's caused some challenges to work through some of the um partnerships that we've had um with um our our coordinator um and the overall APAC group. Um I've personally then
stepped in to um fill a lot of those um duties along with um uh Angelina Ironcloud who's been our cultural liaison. and I want to thank her also for stepping up um and really um helping out um with this transition time. And then also um Dr. Jenny Zumbush has been
very instrumental in compiling lots of information and data sources that we've not historically been able to have um accessible with Apac and so we've had much more robust conversations around data. Um I will uh give I will give her
a buzz here in a moment but you all have the letter here and uh the board will have 30 days to um uh respond and that is something that in partnership with administration um and the board chair that we have um sent a response back in um based upon the letter that you have
before you tonight >> that on my calendar. Okay, sounds good. Thank you, Dr. Thomas. Um, next up we have um item number 14B which is resolutions and
allocation report for the LTFM and safe schools program for Southwest Metro. Uh, this this is um for board action and requires a roll call vote. Um, Director Powers, do you have anything to present
on this? Oh, is it Dr. Thomas? >> Sorry, Ashley just walked in. >> Oh, yeah. >> Great. Please come on up. Please come on up. >> Sorry I'm late. >> No, it's okay. >> It's like at the grocery store and I thought I had time.
>> Um, sorry. I'm just pulling it up right now. >> Sure. >> Okay. Well, we understand that usually this letter comes much sooner, but due to a lot of the challenges that we faced, uh, we wanted to give time for the
district to provide the proper information, which, you know, we kind of got our hands tied. So, hence why we are now presenting our letter. Um, if you guys want, I can just highlight kind of our top seven things of what
we're recommending and then kind of give our little shout out to the people that helped us. Um, one thing is we did recommend tribal nation training for educators, administrators, and schoolboard members.
uh it's very important to understand all of the nuances that come with a lot of like statute requirements and stuff. So, um curriculum planning is a big one. Like we understand that we got to be on
the teaching and learning committee, but we felt like it was more of like just presenting what's being taught versus actually having our voice about what's being taught. So we definitely recommend working with the APEC to properly teach things because we look
a lot onto the history but we also don't look on like current you know econom like lives of tribal nations you know so it's very much of like we live in tepee not houses you
know like there needs to be a lot more work when it involves the curriculum involving Native Americans just in general. eneral. Um, we definitely recommend like the working with APEC when it comes to professional development.
Uh, there's not a lot of great resources, but some of us definitely know the resources to utilize. Uh the dreamcatcher project, we had a we had information last year on it, but we didn't hear anything about it this year
and we feel like it is something that we just need to keep talking about and working with. Um responsibility and implementation. Uh there's definitely like a lot more
oversight that needs to be done from higher up on what the coordinator or liaison's doing on the day-to-day basis. We feel like it's just kind of a go do your thing and hopefully it's good where we just feel like there needs to be more
oversight of the program in general. Um and then we definitely recommend doing T-C. We know we have not met the threshold that we're required to do it, but Tene is a very useful resource and tool for districts.
Um >> Ashley, can you for the community um Tene the acronym so folks understand? >> Oh, sorry, my apologies. It's tribal nations education committee. Uh they work with so many different schools. They have so many different
professionals that are a part of that. So they have countless resources and it's very good to get teacher well not teachers schools to work with them to figure out kind of what they're doing right and what needs improvement. So
again we recommend that as well. Um and then the achievement gap definitely recommend trying to get it to where it needs to be. Um, so yeah, that's all I have right
now. If you guys have any questions, hopefully I can answer them. >> Board members, any comments or questions for Ashley? >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. Well, thank you for your time. >> Thank you for being here. Thank you.
>> Okay. Okay. Then moving forward again, uh we have an action item. Um res two resolutions. Um I will ask for a motion and a second. On the first one, approval of of the res resolution approving the
Southwest Metro Intermediate School District number 288's long-term facility maintenance program budget and authorizing the inclusion of a proportionate share of those projects in the district's application for longterm facility maintenance revenue.
Is there a motion >> made >> by Director Johnson and a second by Director Olstead? Uh, Director Powers, you have anything that you want to >> Nothing in particular that stands out on this one. This is pretty standard for us
for the our inclusion in the southwest metro part. So, um, yeah, nothing in particular. >> Any questions for Director Powers before we vote? Hearing none. I'll start with you, Director Atinson. >> I, >> Director Johnson, >> I. >> Director Mason, >> I.
>> Director Olsad, >> I. >> Director France, >> I. >> And Director Smith, >> I. >> I am an I. Okay. So, that passes 70. Uh the next resolution um up to I will take a motion in a second. And this resolution is approving the um Southwest
Metro Intermediate School District number 288 safe school program and authorizing the inclusion of a proportionate share of this program in the district's application for safe school revenue. Do I have a motion? So made >> by director Johnson and a second
>> by director Mason. >> Any questions or comments for uh Director Powers? Okay. Hearing none. I'll start with you. Director Smith >> I. >> Uh Director France. >> I. >> Director Olsen. >> I. >> Director Mason. >> I. >> Director Johnson. >> I. >> Director Atinson I.
>> And I'm an I. So that passes 70. Thank you for u being here Mr. powers to walk in case we had questions. Um the next item, there is no board action. Um but this is the first reading of the LTFM
2026 pay in 2027 for fiscal year 2028 discussion. Uh and Director Powers, open it up to you. >> Yeah, what we've got here is our normal 10-year plan. Um, I've included a lot of
things in here um that have been left out of the previous plan, including the roofing projects. Um, I wanted to make sure this is a a much more realistic um long-term look. Um, the only thing that it doesn't go beyond that 10 year. Um,
there's a chunk of things that I wish I could put in at the end um that we just it's we're just not there yet. uh the rest of the roofs. Um there's a probably about 20 $25,000 worth of stuff that we could toss on on the end. Um 25,000 25
million, excuse me. Um think a bigger number. Um but in all honesty, this gives us a really good chance to uh at the very least keep up on our maintenance issues, the most dire ones. Um is there any questions that might be for
any of those? I assume everyone's had a chance to peek at it if you haven't. >> Board members, >> Director France, uh the only question that I have because we tended historically to be surprised by this is some sort of inflationary percentage
that's added into things that are closer to, you know, 5 years and beyond. uh because normally when they come into net present value dollars um we usually find ourselves slightly underfunded or things have gone a little ary in the market.
>> No, that's a that's a very good question. So this particular plan um I went with current costs >> which are about 30% more than they were just two years ago for construction and everything else. So these just the base
numbers have been adjusted by 30%. And that's I'm verifying those as I get chances to with different estimates on different projects. On top of that, we've also got a yearly adjustment which will um if you're looking at a good
example might be year 2029 which we're going to have an adjustment of 1.6 six or 6% basically above the cost of this year which that still won't I don't think it's going to match it but I really can't estimate any more than or
any much more than that. Um so I'll just keep readjusting as we go along. Um I'll keep monitoring how the inflation's hitting the construction projects and then if we need to um we'll adjust as as we need to. >> Thank you. Um, just maybe a suggestion as times
change and people change where you wrote on the very last part of your spreadsheet that says total project cost with the inflation factor. Maybe you just want to indicate what that how what factor you used, what percentage you used. That's a good question. >> Just so for historical reasons. >> Yep. It's actually on the top of the chart. >> Oh, it is on top of
>> Yeah. And that's and that's I'm glad you pointed that out because that's something that I want to make sure everyone sees. I'm not just throwing out these weird numbers. It's going to be 1.05 1.055 055. >> Typically I advance it by a half of a percent >> for each year. Um there again just
because we don't know but yes on the top of the chart those those adjustments will be there. >> Okay perfect. Oh okay. Yeah I see that there's a lot of stuff on that chart and that's why I want to make sure that I mean I've brought several different iterations of not just this one but
every other one to the board. And yes, things change and I want to make sure that you know where to look for those things as they change. >> No, I appreciate that. I think that's helpful. Thank you. Any other questions? >> Okay, moving on to the next item, which
is the annual lead and water management plan. Don't go too far, Director Powers. This also is uh report only. Um but Director Powers, if you have anything to share on that. So, this is a a typical
of our our yearly um announcements, proclamations that we put out there to show that we are um doing our due diligence to check for lead in water and making sure that if we do find it that we're mitigating in one, however
way we do it. Um, a couple of things just for general knowledge, a couple of things that we look at if we do get up a test where it's a little bit elevated. First thing we're going to do is make sure that it's not just because the tap hasn't been used or run. Um, sometimes the water if it's stagnant, we'll test a
little bit higher. If that's not the case, then we'll start looking at other types of things. I haven't run into any of those situations here in Prior Lake. I have in other districts where we actually will have to um if we run into a situation where it's testing high, we
may have to replace piping um from whatever distance we need to. So it could be all the way from the boiler room where the water is coming into the building all the way to that particular faucet where we're testing high. Usually if it's testing if we're doing something like that, it's testing in more than one
location high. Um usually if we're testing the we've got one classroom where it's high, I'll take out that drinking water fountain or I'll take out that wash station and the piping around there and that usually takes care of it. So this statement basically is telling
people that yes, we are paying attention to that and we're going to help make sure that we mitigate that if we do find it. >> Questions, discussion? >> Hearing none. Thank you, Director Powers. >> All right.
Um, next up is item number 14E, language access plan. Uh this the plan was presented at the May 18th uh study session. Board action is requested tonight. Uh director um Chuka is
available for any questions, but I will >> I will have Oh, she's not here. Oh, sorry. Um I will uh entertain a motion and a second for that. >> So, >> there was a lot of them. >> Well, Dustin,
>> Director Smith and Director. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh is there any questions or discussion on that? Hearing none, uh we will take a vote. All in favor say I. >> I. Oppose say nay. And that passes 70.
All right. Uh next up uh is the consensus resolution for community education that we will take uh action on adopting the resolution for the certification of the district's 719 census
for the district 719 census. Is there any >> correct? I don't think Joel is with us tonight but just Oh, you got Okay, Lisa. Oh, >> I was okay. So, I'm going to entertain a motion and a second for that first. So, make by director Atinson. second >> and a second by Director Johnson. Uh,
Director Ryder, you have something to share? >> Yes. Um, Joel asked me to just kind of help people understand what this is about. Our levy requires that the funding for community education is based upon the census. So when you find that there is an increase in the census from
one year to the next, then it is an important thing for us to consider having this resolution approved so that it can then be reflected on the levy with the proper um census information and the proper dollar amounts being calculated then for the levy.
>> Very good. Any questions board members? All right. Hearing none. All in favor say I. >> I. Oppose say nay. That passes 70. All right. The next item on the agenda is our enrollment report. And I will
turn it over to you again, Director Ryder. >> Yes. Thank you. Okay. So, for the enrollment report, we have um the similar reports that you've seen on a regular basis. So, let's start with a one that is for I'm sorry, I'm just got myself lost here a little. Um we'll
start with the enrollment history, which has been updated through the month of June, June 1st. And um you will see that the grade grades are all listed across that um spreadsheet and we run with a total of 8,431.
These counts as you may recall are kind of head counts right and they are not necessarily reflective of average daily membership meaning um the calculation that is used in order to do the funding um the calculation identifies if a
student's here partially then they may not be a 1.0 no ADM but they might be something less that still contributes towards our total funding and um you can see that our final fall count um from October was 8536.
So from 8536 to 8431 is a comparison that one can make because they are both headcounts. when you make the comparison to the revised budget which is in the peach color at least that's what I see that number we budgeted is 8501 so we
are lower than what we had budgeted but again we will find ourselves um seeing that calculation depending upon because we were we were slightly above for a few months there so it's just a question of how much that um total ADM calculation comes out to be and as we report on a
routine basis now our Mars data that is being calculated. Um and we'll have more final information um come July. Um that's that report. We'll go next to the kindergarten report
and it has this is kind of um I'm showing every week. Okay. So you can go back and see the various different how this all um shifted and changed. If you recall when we um worked with our budget calculation
for revenue for 2627, we had initially thought 529 for kindergarten. And I um I suggested that we lower that to 489 as our information from principles and what they thought they were actually going to see in each of their schools was leaning more
towards that 489 number. So as of um May 29th, for example, we are at 481 is projected. if you consider us being 95% of the way um to having everyone enrolled. And so that's much closer than what we had a few um like a month or two
ago, right? So I'm feeling better about that. Um we still I mean they're very busy with enrollments at this time. So um we're just going to keep keep rolling through all those enrollments that are coming in and um we'll be continuing to give you this information as we move
forward. Board members, any questions or discussion for director Ryder? I just have one question about um about funding and the loss of enrollment when we go back to it always seems like every year we lose about 100 students from the beginning of the year to the end of the year
>> and I understand we get the majority of our funding in October. How does the funding when we lose students throughout the year because there is some ADM funding as well. Can you just explain for our community how that funding works? Um, and I know there's students that's graduate, there's PSO, there's a
lot of factors, a lot of question because most of it is at the high school it looks like. Yes. >> But I just think it's important for the community to understand that um that the impact that has to the enrollment, >> right? >> Or to the revenue, I'm sorry, the revenue generated in the district. >> So the state requires reporting of
student counts twice a year, fall and end of year. And so the fall reporting is something that um can be adjusted up until December 31st. Um but it is supposed to be those students that were actually being served as of October 1, if they're enrolled as of October 1. So
you can find um that remember all of our information we submit to the state has to be edited against every other school district in the state. So somebody else is claiming the same student for a day, that's going to be an error and neither of us going to be able to claim that student until it gets cleaned up. So that's kind of how that works for the
fall. Um it is used more as a it's not a calculation of ADM because at fall October one it's like how many at that date right so that's where I say it's a headcount. However, October numbers are oftentimes used for many other purposes, right?
When talking about uh free reduced eligibility and how that then has in the past been our compensatory red formula or it can be um the number that is used in a grant reflected of what is your um proportionate free reduced compared to your total population as of October 1.
Um that doesn't when you use those numbers, you're not worried about the ADM. You're it's a count, right? And so those percentages can mean a little bit more that way. When we talk about year-end numbers, Mars reporting, um, our year-end reporting started, I
believe, I want to say she started doing that in April. Um, and we're going to continue that all the way through December 31st as well. But typically for us, because we have an earlier audit, we work really hard to get all of our errors cleaned up as soon as possible. and um are looking at our July
submission to be like our final submission of of any significant change and anything after that would just be kind of responding to other districts that had an air and we have to help fix it. Um and so you'll find that usually if you look back our July or August
reports of our Mars data and what that looks like on a finance perspective um they're pretty close to what we use in our audit. Um those numbers though can shift and change up and up through December 31st. Your revenue is always going to be based
on the final final numbers, but our audit has to happen sooner. And so there are estimates that we're making at that point in time and that's how we're booking that. Um trying to get back to your your point of how is this important and necessary for our community to understand. Average daily membership um
is for all grades K through six. A 1.0 O means it's a student who's here from the start of the school year to the end of the school year and was enrolled with us fully. Um if you are grades 7 through 12, you can still be here the same full
year, but now you're times 1.2 because of the waiting. And that waiting helps us to address some of the additional costs that we have at the secondary level. So, um, in total, you're taking a look at the average daily membership of all students served throughout the year.
When you have a PSO student, for example, they may or may not be included in our account depending upon what school they attended. And so, that gets really kind of confusing and it's hard for me to make a blanket statement because we have both happening. Um so it's really about making sure that every
single student has an enrollment number. Every single student's time that they are served with us has to be closely um monitored and calculated. That's why attendance is so important to us as well for families. And so um it's something that they they work really hard to do. This file that goes in on a routine
basis is very long and is all you know numbers across the whole page. And so it's a matter of um that data being submitted, edited, resubmitted to with um areas being cleaned up and we just keep working at it until we get it where it's a completely clean file and then
submit that final. >> Does that help? >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm just like if you look from like uh May to June loss of 30 students, do we lose funding for that? I think I probably should have simplified my question. >> So we we might, but you can also see July and August we were over that
number, right? you know, so it's going to become an average overall. I did look back and you can see that there's >> there's some years in which we had um we were above the final um we were above the budgeted number for like half the year and then we fell below it, right? >> That's an average.
>> That's probably more closely to the average. This year we were above two months and then we fell below it. So we had a stronger decline this year than we had seen in the last year. Um, and that is something that we're going to have to kind of watch and monitor. Again, that
could be a result of, remember, it's a headcount. So, if more of our students were PSO, they weren't present, right? Um, but the question now will be, will they be counted as us receiving aid or not? Um, when we receive aid on students who are attending PSO, that means we're
paying their bill. When we don't receive the aid on the PSO students, we're receiving a very small piece and then we don't pay a bill. the state pays it for us. >> That's interesting. >> Okay. >> Thank you. That's helpful. >> Any other questions?
>> Just one. Um on the 457 that we have, I think as we're accepting open enrolled in students, we're putting them into that number, right? Do you know like the recent counts of open enrolled versus in district of that 457? Um >> I'm sorry. I just got to get to where you are. 457.
>> Sorry, the kindergarten enrollment. Okay, hang on. Um, >> 529. >> Oh, okay. So, I'm sorry. What were you saying? >> I was just asking what is the how many are open enroll versus indistract? Do you have that handy or >> I do have it handy. Just give me one
moment. >> Yeah. Okay. So, um let's see if it has a sum total at the bottom. I think it does. I can see there's no subtotal but I have total with OEA. Okay. So let's see I can
subtract it here. Looks like we have 74. Total all school students is 3211. Total students with new OE I'm looking at 74 students. Wait a minute. Hold on.
Wrong tab. My apologies. I can follow up too if you don't have any. >> I think I'm going to have to get back to you on that because I have to add some numbers and I don't want to do that and get it wrong. >> Yeah. Yeah. I was just curious how how we were looking as far as the balance of that. >> I'll get those numbers for you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep.
>> Anybody else? All right, moving on. Uh, next item on the agenda is the final um 20 2026 27 budget adoption. Um, this will uh be
action and roll call vote. Uh, I will entertain a motion and a second >> made >> by Director Olad. >> Second >> by Director France. uh and then we'll open it up for any questions for director Ryder.
>> So in May um 18th you heard and saw the narrative document um and nothing really was changed from that document except a few tweakings that I mentioned as I went through that in May. The um the narrative does explain what
we assumed for each of the different areas of revenue in the um 27 26 27 school years budget that we developed. It does talk about the enrollment change um over the next five years. It talks about um food service, community
education, and debt redemption as well so people can understand our next year's budget. Then it switches over to assumptions that were used in a five-year projection and focuses on the revenue as well as expenditures and the enrollment projection and the analysis there. It does provide when you begin on
page 10 um page 10 is a nice sheet that is able to be able to see like what is our projected balance at the start of this year for uh fund balance. What is the um at June 3026? what is the projected revenues now included in the
budget for general fund for 27 along with the expenditures and what is that projected balance at the end. It does provide that we are going to be u projecting over the 8% um fund balance policy that we strive to attain and re maintain.
You do see on the middle section of that report the restricted for and all of the list of things that we we are required to carry a fund balance for if we have any dollars unspent. And so those are listed there. So what we do is we take
um the total budget. We subtract off all these that are restricted and it's the unassigned then or dollars that are even special ed is considered unassigned in this circumstance that are available for other things that are not listed below in the restricted and that is then what
you see um at the top part and that's what we use our calculation for for the fund balance. I would note that um there is um an additional document that I believe was provided to everyone on
the board with regard to the breakdown of that unassigned or that top part number for that 113,190 190,4410. Um and it ties to help understand exactly where are those dollars being
spent as that was a question asked recently. Um, so that's something to take note of. I would then point to pages 11, 12, and 13 as being projections for three different I'll say what if scenarios.
Um, table A is if we were to just retain our current referendum allowance and that were renewed and what those years would look like. Um, you'll see that the expenditures remain the same in each of
these three. um tables. Table B takes the information, but now it um replace it revokes our current referendum and replaces it with 1,386 per adjusted pupil unit. And um
that is what you would see for revenue. The expenditures stay the same. And then table C is using the assumption of revoking our 62397 and replacing it with 1741 per APU. Um, I know we've been talking a lot about what's the increase,
right? And so, let me put that into perspective. Table A is 623.97. Table B is and that's $25.75 per um month. Right now the um table B
is uh the $32 extra per month and that is the $7 million is what's generated there and that's the 138597 technically I rounded here and then that table C is going to be the $46 per month
or 1740.97 u per APU that generates um a total um or additional revenue excuse me of 10 million262214. So that is reflected and proposing like or showing that going forward.
Page 14 shows the graphic visual of that and then our enrollment. So just talking through that that's the um the narrative that you have before you. What you need and I um would ask that action be taken
on is the resolution which shows the funds, the total revenues in each of those funds and the total expenditures. Board members questions I just have a question. Um it says in our board policy 701 that we are to provide any district um community member
a copy of the budget detailed budget um upon the request. What would we be providing to them if they were to ask for that? Um because there's you've sent us several documents which are helpful but there's not one clear like one document that has all the information in
one place in one place. Um I think that all of these tables A, B and C are reflective of what we have been showing for the um the current year 2627 is shown there second column in and it shows it both it's what we show monthly it's what we're showing here in our
projections and it is what we show in our financial statements. So for me I would suggest that that is the most consistent document we have that is going to show that level of detail. Um detail can be very subjective like what does it mean to you? what does it mean to me? Right? And so, um, if you're
talking about what statute requires, they require something that looks a lot more like page 10 where you have to list out your beginning fund balance, your revenues, your expenditures, and your ending fund balance. And that's in a particular formula format, excuse me, that the state requires and must be
published. that is on our website from 25 >> um 20 for the 25 um sorry it was done last fall and would have been reflective of the audited 25 and our budget for 26 at the time which would have been the
adopted. So we'll do that again as we have the audit for 26 completed and show then that adopted budget for 27. Um so that's another report sometimes people are referring to when when they ask for that summary information. Um, so it does
that help you to >> Yeah, I just think consistency of documents. It's something that I've struggled with on our board for and I know we've had change in um you know change in your role. So it's just consistency. I think it helps it u make it easier to understand the documents for myself and for our community. So
thank you. >> Anybody else? >> No, I mean for me I I've sent in several questions. Thank you for answering them. And um I guess the only piece I'm still um uncomfortable with is just the including the revenue from the sale of
the DSC property and and also having expenses and and doing a build out on on Greenwood before we actually have that funding. So um you know I don't love spending money before we have it. Um so that's that's my concern. I
know you know hopefully everything goes well but we're still in the due diligence period and we don't have you know closing dates. nothing is approved, things like that. So, >> yeah, >> just a statement that I'm uncomfortable with that. >> We do have the revised budget, which is an opportunity for us to adjust for any changes that may occur between now and
then. And it is not our expectation to spend those dollars um on anything until those dollars are in hand. >> So, we wouldn't be doing any um grainwood buildout for >> buildout for administrator staff. We are
moving to tables and chairs that are just lined up in rooms. Um there's no buildout until this is >> kind of a shared Google space temporarily. Yep. >> Until we work through all. >> Anybody else? >> Okay. Hearing none. I just have a couple of comments. I'm sorry I'd like to add
if it's okay. >> Go ahead. Um yeah, I mean one of the most important responsibilities of our schoolboard is adopting a balanced budget and I'm really proud of the work that um has gone into bringing this balanced budget forward to our community this evening. Um I think you know a lot of the reasons why the district was able
to achieve a balanced budget was through a lot of the hard decisions that we've made at our table here. whether it's the sale of the DSC, um elementary school consolidations due to declining enrollment, um we've received as special additional ed um increased ed um funding for
special education and despite the ongoing challenge that we can see with the loss of enrollment um also equals loss of revenue. We're able to bring a balanced budget which I'm very proud of. My concern and I've I've said this before and you'll hear me say it again tonight is that my concern
is not whether the balance is budget. The budget is balanced, but my concern is that this budget does not reflect the priorities the board adopted last fall. And I raised this concern when I voted no on the budget reductions that were brought forth by administration. And I raised this again our last study
session. The guardrails that we adopted by the board last fall clearly directed the district to maximize operational efficiencies so that more resources could be directed towards classroom instruction and student learning. If that goal was not achievable, I would just like to ask why that concern was
not raised when the with the board in November of 2025. Of the more than four million in reductions made to balance this budget, approximately 64% were studentf facing cuts. The remaining reductions came through elementary school consolidations.
While we have discussed these reductions in detail, we have not seen how they result in more resources reaching the classroom. This includes support for our advanced learners following the elimination of the SAGE program. Despite the fact that the board did not support that reduction and Dr. Thomas committed
to redefining how we serve gifted learn gifted learners without a replacement program in place, many families have chosen other educational options resulting in that loss of enrollment that we cons continue to see and the loss of revenue. When we
we reduce teachers and student programs rather than administrative positions, families will choose to seek alternatives they believe are better to meet the needs of their students. I recognize and I apprec appreciate the work that went into balancing this budget and I support responsible fiscal
management. However, I do not believe that this budget reflects the priorities adopted by the board last fall. Thank you. >> Anybody else? Dr. France, >> first of all, I know that the um
our current financial situation is fairly dire and with the budget cuts um people are doing more than one job right now. We have a skeletal administrative staff. Most of them are also taking on two roles at one time. Uh which is
really really difficult. Um things like having one payroll specialist for the number of people we have is insane. Um and our educators are exhausted. They do make up well over 80% of our total cost. This does reflect the additional costs
that we see including the two contracts that we just approved because you have to have increased um amounts just to give people a living wage um which for summer still barely in education. Uh we saw a 13% increase and our health care
and that was after probably a ton of work to keep that number within control. as a business owner, um many myself and my colleagues have seen excess of 30% increase in health. So, I do appreciate the work this administration has done
and quite frankly um we really need to do something about increasing the revenue through levies simply because um we're continuing to starve our district while we're asking them just to eat less
and do more. And it's um we're in a sad situation. So, I'm really hoping that the community sees these numbers, understands these numbers, calls administration, and uh gets their questions answered in a fact-based way, and um that um that we get out of this
mess somehow. But I do appreciate the work that administration has done, that our leadership has done, and the sacrifices our educators and staff have made in order to continue giving the level of service that our students deserve. Anyone else
hearing? None. We will go on with our roll call vote. And I will start with you. Director Smith. >> I. >> Director France. >> I. >> Director Olad. >> I. >> Director Mason. >> Nay. >> Director Johnson. >> Nay. >> Director Atinson. >> Nay.
>> And I am an I. So that passes 40. >> Three. >> Three. >> Three. Thank you. Can't add. like I say to my kids that you know what I meant, right? >> Okay. Uh next up, uh we have the um Prior Lake School Bus Association
Transportation Contract. Um this contract was presented at the May 18th study session. So we are going to take action on that. I'll take a motion and a second. So made by Director France. >> Second. >> And that's by Director Johnson.
Um, Director Ryder, do you have anything to share on that? >> Just a bit of a summary for the public. Um, this is an agreement that it has taken us some time to put together. Um, and that whole time has in from my
perspective felt very collaborative and very beneficial for the district in the whole. I believe um this agreement takes us forward 5 years um with the option to um have conversations again for
negotiation of future rates without having to do an RFP after those five years if that were chosen. Uh there is quite a bit of information in this contract that comes from what we asked for in our uh request for proposals and um this contract has been
reviewed by our attorneys as well as their attorneys. Um there is the summary of rates and fees that you will see at the very end of the contract and there is a list also of the equipment and we um there is some things items within
this agreement that are kind of a work in progress. One is our routing for this year and putting it into a new system which will adjust and modify things as we move forward. Um, additionally, there are some things that we've asked for in the RFP that aren't in place at this
moment but won't be in place either overnight, right? So, it's going to take a little time. So, we have a plan to build into it and that's what you'll see on the last few pages with regard to equipment. Um so I I feel very positive about this agreement in the fact that it
was um work that was sincere and um and very I felt meaningful because there was a lot of information that we both had to share and that was a very good process for us. So very thankful to all parties
and for the uh work that Michelle Chuka did with us in helping to um just have the conversation and help us understand special education better too as well. And Dan Powers um overseeing the transportation. This um
I think has already been signed and is in your um hands to sign if you approve tonight. >> Directors, any comments or questions? >> Um I'll just come in. I think it's I'm I'm so grateful that we're able to continue to work with the Prior Lake Savage um um school bus association as a
parent who's have has had kids riding those buses for a long time. They just offer a tremendous service to our districts and are so friendly to parents and so um welcoming and helpful um for students. So, I'm I'm grateful that we're able to come to terms with them and look forward to seeing some
efficiencies hopefully with the contract. So, thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Yes, Dr. >> Johnson. As far as the the routing, um you said it's still in progress. >> Um do you have an estimated time for that?
>> Yep. So, they finished all the routing of the summer school students on the new system. Um there was some work I think they felt they still needed to kind of do manually. The challenge before them on summer school is always you have an initial list and then you have families
making decisions to go, well, I changed my mind. and I'm not going to or maybe I will add on. And so there's they have been dealing with a lot of changes on a daily basis. And so getting to a point where they finally feel like this is this is set and good um has been a lot of work on their part. Um and when I say
they I do mean the um the folks at our at our bus garages um particularly um Lindsay and Nikki and their teams and then also um CISO. CESO's working to help them answer their questions on how do I do this in the system? Does this
look right to you? Is this in right? Um, a lot of our information we used to like hand key in all the information. And now there's more opportunities with the new software which we will explore further as we build out next year's routes. Um, but opportunities to import data and not
necessarily key it all in, right? And so those kinds of um efficiencies will certainly be made um made use of. But the next step is for us to be working with the data that needs to go from our infinite campus to the easy routing so
that it it feeds it every night any changes that occur. And that was not happening previously for all students. It was happening only on our gen routes. And so that's going to be a significant change for us. And I think that that we're hopeful that that will make things um much easier >> as a whole.
>> Okay. And then uh kind of a followup it so everyone is getting hands-on with this. This isn't something that we are waiting >> to to get in. >> No. And >> I know I know members of our bus company are here. So I mean if I mean if there's
anything you want to speak to um but I think everything is I mean there's just conversations going back and forth is like do you need any help? Is everything set and ready to go? From what we see, this is what we're seeing. How does that look to you? And so it's a it's the ability for someone to oversee it, who
understands how this product works. >> And yet the details of getting everything in is being learned as you do it, right? And that's important. And so I think that's I I'm I'm impressed by how well see things seem to be going
from my perspective, but I'm I'm on the fringe. >> Yes. So, >> I guess my my head goes, okay, it's the first day of school and I don't want something to go really wrong. >> Yeah. >> Right. And so, >> obviously, I'm obviously
>> like it did this year before is thinking the same the same thing. So, that's my biggest concern to make sure >> obviously you all have enough time to play with this thing and that you're comfortable with it. um that we have obviously it's going to be the
first day of school so there's going to be things um so that we have you know the least hiccups as possible. summer school for instance. So we did all of the work on easy routing and had it set our ways but we also did it the
way that we normally did then like taking the routes that we built on easy routing >> up but so they they can hear you weren't ready >> explain. So, we took easy routing and we put all of the students in there that we're going to have for summer school
and um updated their forms for what each student requires. And then we built the routes on easy routing. Um ask questions as we need to. We also for our driver's sake, they don't like change as much. Um and so we went back to just like typed
it up as we normally would have so that they could see it both ways so that if something would happen, we still have that side of things as well. um just as like a transition piece to help get us through. And I know going forward we can message parents with their pickup times and bus stop times and whatnot. We still
called all the families this time around too just because that's what they're used to. Um so just until we work through everything and get it situated. It's a transition phase. >> Awesome. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Can I just make a statement? My name is Jerry Barren. I'm one of the supervisors
um for Prior Lake school bus and I just want you guys to know um that our negotiation process was a very tough process. Um and we just want to give a huge thank you to both Lisa Ryder and Michelle
Chuka for their willingness to listen to us, for their open communication, and just their patience with us. And you know, it's never easy when you're in a situation like this. Um, but I just I have to applaud them. I mean, they were so good to work with. So, I want you to
know that. >> Oh, thank you. Thank you for sharing that. >> Thank you. >> I know when Director Ryder said that the um work has been meaningful, it's it's truly the meaning comes in the relationship and the collaboration and that has been evident from the very
beginning. So, kudos to all of you. Thank you. >> Let's hope that we're taxpayers and family. Like, my kids here, I want them to have the >> Thank you so much. Thank you so much. >> You're welcome. >> All right. So, with that, we will take a
vote. All in favor say I. >> I. Oppos say nay. >> That passes 70. Thank you very much. Okay. Uh where are we? Collabor. Okay. Next up is
the collaborative student transportation contract that we will take action on. Um, I will take a motion and a second for that >> by Director France. Second >> and a second by Director Smith.
Um, Director Ryder, do you have anything to share on that? Just a a little bit of a why why do we have two contracts like we do? Um, all of our general ed routing will be managed fully and solely by the Prior Lake uh school bus association as
well as our special education routes. We are looking for a backup support for when it comes to students that need to be transported outside of our district. Um they may be needing transportation for a care and treatment or a homeless situation or possibly um special ed
needs, but it's having the agreement in place and yet having it just kind of there in case we need it. And so they understand that that's what they do. um they work with many districts in the metro area just solely for that purpose of being kind of the we can be your
extra support. Um this could help us as the year goes on oftent times the the needs can rise and you may or may not necessarily have um a lot of room on your routes unless you disrupt a bunch of other students and such. And so this
could be an answer for us as we move forward in some of those areas. As you take a look at um this is a 5-year agreement as well. It has its rates laid out 4% increase every year. Um and I should have mentioned that was the case on the other contract as well with a few
exceptions on that. Um so not a lot done here with regard to um dialogue and conversations as their rates are kind of put out in the proposal and um we intend to use them and they know so um on a fringe basis.
Thank you for the proactive work on that. Um board members any questions or discussions? Hearing none I will take a vote. All in favor say I. >> I oppose say nay. That passes 70. Thank you.
All right. Next up is adoption of resolution uh resolution establishing dates for filing affidavit of candidacy. Uh roll call is requested here. Um and
so I will take a motion and a second for that. So made >> by director Johnson and a second by director France. Okay. Is this you, Dr. Thomas? Um, >> are you presenting on this?
>> I'll just share um as I did the last time u the critical component of the resolution um that the period for filing affidavit of candidacy for the office of the school board member of independent school district number 719 shall begin on July 14th, 2026 and shall close on
July 28th, 2026. An affidavit of candidacy must be filed in the office of the school district clerk and the $2 filing fee paid prior to 5:00 p.m. on July 28th, 2026. Um in the resolution um you will see the
copy of the form um that they would um come to get to complete. And I just want to uh remind um potential candidates that the general election shall be held on Tuesday, November 3rd, 2026. At that election, four members will be selected
to the school board for terms of four years each. Um those are the critical components. The only other thing I would note um is that the uh the forms will be available here at um the district
office. Um later in July, potentially into August, we will be office out of the Greenwood building. Um and so we would make sure that anybody who is um filing that we would remind them of where that new turnin date may be if it conflicts with the date of the closure
of the candidacy window. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppos same name. >> Resolution. >> Call. >> Oh yeah. Roll call vote. I didn't mark that. Okay. Thank you. Uh Director Atinson. >> Hi. >> Director Johnson.
>> I. >> Director Mason. >> I. >> Director Olstead. >> I. >> I. >> Director Smith. >> Hi. >> And I am an I. So that passes 70. All right. Next um is adoption of resolution establishing procedures for
the counting of write in votes for the school board election. Uh I will take a um a motion and a second for that. >> So made >> director Johnson. >> Second. >> Director Atinson. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Uh Dr. Thomas. >> Uh yes. Just really briefly, I would just share that there's an option for folks to have writeins and that we would be following Minnesota statute section 204B.09 subd sub subdivision 3C to adopt a resolution governing the counting of
write in votes for local elective offices. That's the con that's the key thing I'll u make sure that it's uh read that we'll follow statute for any writeins and protocols for counting said write in votes. >> Very good. Um well that is roll call
vote as well. So I will start with you. Director Atinson >> I. >> Director Johnson >> I. >> Director Mason >> I. >> Director Olad. >> Hi. >> Director France. >> I. >> Director Smith >> I. >> I. That passes 70.
Okay. Next up is the capital project levy. Um, this item is um authorizing administration to prepare and submit review and comment to the Minnesota Department of Education as defined
within the ballot language as presented. Uh, I'll take a motion and a second for that. >> Director Mason and Director Olstead. And this is not roll call. Okay. Uh, and then I'll open it up for questions or discussion.
>> Dr. Thomas, you want us? >> Thank you. Um, so this evening, uh, board, we'll be sharing with you, um, a more granular itemized conversations that we've been having as an administrative team, um, outlining, um, some of the needs that we've identified
through a capital levy that we are proposing that the board and the um, ultimately um, bring to the community for their consideration. um what we have here would be um would not be as granular that we would submit to the state. Uh but we wanted you all to understand kind of what was the thinking
behind some of the components that we would be ultimately um aggregating up into big themes um that we would send to the commissioner for review and that there is options for um any revisions as well even after said review period by
the end of the month. um should you know new leadership and um other staff coming on board have uh additional conversations or perspective that they would like to add that may change that in addition to how we would then begin crafting uh the capital levy uh project
campaign. So with that I'm going to turn it over to Dre Ryder. >> You Dr. Thomas um I can go to the podium if you prefer to have me show this to the public. >> Sure. Okay. >> Whichever you >> Whichever be good.
>> So, what we've got included here, as Dr. Thomas has mentioned, is um a bit more detailed than what we plan to put into the review and comment, but the the um request before you right now is for us to be able to move ahead with that. And
so, let me just find this right one here. So, this document, let me make it bigger. Um that might be a little bit too big. There we go. Okay. So, we're starting at the top and we receive general education
funding that is dedicated for operating capital needs. We have seen that those dollars come before and it's all part of our gened formulas. Okay, that is the green bar that you see. And for us, that's about a $2 million mark as to how
much revenue is usually available there. Um, we have broken that down into what is technology, teaching and learning and operations as to what those budgets would look like. And you'll see that some of those years look a little bit light compared to others. And I'm grateful for that because if that were
the case, it would allow for us to possibly save some money in the long run. And what I mean by that is a lot of our curriculum tends to come to us with here's the cost if you buy it each year, right? But if you were to buy it five
years at once, we'll cut you a really good deal. And yet we don't have the we don't have the buying power, right? We don't have the the possibility for us to purchase something for $600,000. All we can maybe afford is is the $150,000. You
follow me? So, it's that kind of a concept that we are going to review and determine whether or not that's a possibility for us moving forward if everything were to work out like this plan defines. So, when you see things that um like 29 for example, where it's
lighter, um just know that that that's that's what we would be thinking of trying to do. Now, the sales proceeds I left out of the operating capital that you see above because it's not our norm, right? So, that's in the white boxes you see in the middle there. You see that
there's $2.4 million in sales proceeds over a two-year period. The plan at this moment is for that um Greenwood ESC Educational Services Center and um that buildout. So $450,000
earmarked. The the next row is debt related capital levy reduced revenue. This isn't an expense. This is where our levy has been reduced by that amount for those two years to compensate for that and still have our operating capital
dollars available for our needs, we would be utilizing this fund balance, the proceeds. Okay. Um over those two years, if for some reason the proceeds were not available to us this year, um then we would have to have that in a revision and how we would manage that
between general fund and operating capital. The last row there is the undetermined use of proceeds. What's remaining? The 555,387 unknown yet. Will it be curriculum needs? How best can we and will we use those?
Then we talk about everything in the blue area. The blue area is what we're calling the total capital project levy. So this is where we laid out for the 10 years, year 1 through year 10, beginning fiscal year 29 on. And some of the items
you're seeing there might be things that we were otherwise covering in our normal operating capital. For an example, um the second row is KM year one through four leases. What is KM? Kanuka Minulta copier machines. Okay. So that is where
we know we're going to be complete with our current contract and we'll have a a new contract that we would need to um address. um other examples and you can see and you can read through those various different items that you see here. Um I want to point out on the far left we
have three main themes. This is where our review and comment will focus on. We will keep it higher level and we will talk about these main three themes. Is it infrastructure? Is it safety and security? Is it instructional investment plan? And what do I mean by that? things
like the second to the last utilities to free up unassigned statute changed. We're now able to utilize that. We currently pay for all of our utilities under the general fund, not capital. Okay. We have about $2.5
million we pay in utilities. If those dollars were instead utilized using the capital projects levy, that then frees up these general fund dollars so we can invest that in um instructional. And so you can see those last two lines
on this sheet shows items that can become 1.5 or $2.7 million over the course of those 10 years each year. And that would be where we would then be able to utilize those dollars for some of the other operational needs in the
classroom, whatever that might look like. Okay. So what we wanted to do is try and determine like what's up here in the norm operating capital. What is it that our needs are down below here? There was
a row and it is the one that says um it's the school site improvements example storage and therefore that row has been that's my plug line. It's the line that makes everything at the top say 3.8 mil. Okay. because if
there's any dollars that are not allocated that year, that's what we're going to look to do is what kinds of improvements can we make to um assist our building sites. So, with that, um I just wanted to explain that document and what we're looking for as far as action tonight is
the ability for us to move forward with this review and comment that needs to go to the Department of Ed. The commissioner receives it from us. If we get it in by June 30th, that means they have 60 days will which will be before the election process begins and so our voters will know for sure like the
ballot language says that it has a positive review and comment from the state >> questions comments. Director Olstead. >> Yes. So um if if we send it in for their review and comment is there what is is there a
scenario where they come back and say we don't like this start over. Does that happen ever? >> Um, I mean, I've I my my past experience has been on review and comments, not about a capital project levy because in my past experience, that's only been used by for tech purposes. And when
that's the case, then you don't need to do one. But when you're doing a building project, you absolutely have to have a review and comment. And that's been my exposure. And I have had plenty of push back on the review and comments when we've sent that in. Um, we've had the architects helping us write that. We
will utilize Ellers and Associates to assist us in helping write this one as well. We have three examples of other schools and how they put it together. It truly is it's more to give them a general idea of what is the plan, you know, and for us to have these kind of um themes I'll say for people to
understand where it is we would be utilizing this. The bottom line though is for us, this is a means for us to be able to stretch those dollars as far as possible so that we can see what we can do and keep things balanced as much as
possible for the next 10 to 12 years. >> So getting feedback from the review and comment is pretty common. >> Yeah. >> And then but it's it doesn't sound like it's ever a no.
Um I I can't speak to exactly how they function with the capital projects levy because they usually have two different teams, right? But I can speak to the fact that um what we're asking for isn't like we don't have a if a specific project
that we're looking to do with this like say we're going to do I don't know um if we didn't have secure open or you know secure um entries to our buildings. That is where I've seen this used quite frequently where it's like we're gonna stage this out and we're going to use
that amount of money every year and this is what we're going to do. We're going to do these two schools now and then we're going to do two more later. You know, there you have a very specific project in mind. For us, this is about coordinating along with our other requests for the referendum to try and
make sure that we can stretch these dollars as far out as possible, stay above that 8% as long as possible. And um you know a lot of this is going to depend on what happens at the state level too >> and the federal level to be honest. Um
so >> okay >> answer your question can I >> um yeah I just want to clarify >> I saw her hand sorry >> I had emailed too but um I think you answered but like everything like the itemized list on here is flexible like
once it's approved that we could change past. So there's I mean some things I don't necessarily agree with on here or I would maybe advocate for something different but um within those categories >> we can kind of shift and we have that flexibility as a district. Okay.
>> And we would expect like when having conversations about an annual budget and preparing the next year's budget like now you're going to have a specific conversation just about the capital projects levy. >> What's the plan here with those dollars? And keep in mind, remember that all proceeds from this go to a particular
fund balance and so that will always be tracked and monitored and available for review. >> And then my second question was just like we're we're showing this as a um flat 3.8 8 and like even some of the salaries for example as you go across
the years they're flat which >> they are flat >> realistic probably but are will that be questioned at all or do we need to >> um any like >> it might be but you also noted that you know as was mentioned earlier we this is a fixed rate um so it is based upon what
happens with our net tax capacity within the community and it is a true statement that that fixed rate is applied to whatever that valuation is. So if the net tax capacity of the comm of the community for our school district does increase, the proceeds will increase. So
that's where the instructional investment plan to me is the huge part about this because should you not um have these other items that you're needing to spend those dollars on and there is a significant increase that could potentially help to
support um things of that nature. Although you will see that once you start dollars moving towards that, you don't see me popping back out of it. Right? So it's like it once you commit 1.2 mil, you need to commit 1.2 mil mill going forward, you know, for whatever it
is that you're committing those dollars for, right? So um there is the thought that yes, salaries will increase. Do you use it for lesser FTEEs as you move forward? That's a possibility. You know, we're going to have to fluctuate and work with that. um when writing the
review and comment. That's a very good point that I think we'll have to, you know, just inquire about like what's best. Do you show it or do you just, you know, know that you're going to have to kind of back off on what you actually use it towards? >> Okay. Yep. Thank you, Director France.
>> So, that partially answered my question because obviously with one increase in salary, we could eat up the entire 3.8 million. Um and we've been experiencing those significant you know rise in expenses over revenue for some time now.
Um so um you know as long as it falls within one of these categories because my understanding is is that one of their their kickbacks are to make it as discreet as possible so it can be proven in a separate report of how the money was spent. So they they go through the
the the narrative to make sure it's discreet. >> Yep. Uh but if we run out of money in one place, as long as it ends up in one of those buckets, we're fine. >> Right. And you'll see when you look at the next item on your agenda for the ballot language that the utilities is brand new, right? So that's something
that wasn't presented in our previous conversations. And so we would be asking for that to be added into it. There's a couple of options we could do to to include that in the ballot question. Remember how we have the list of things that it can be used towards? We want that to encompass everything that we
would intend to use this for and everything that we write the review and comment for. Um the one other question that I had was um you know I 3.8 million for people who aren't dealing with a budget the size of
ours and the overriding expenses of fixed and staff and uh staff salary and benefits that takes up the largest percentage. We have very little flexible spending. Um, my concern would be that, you know, people see, oh, I just gave
you 3.8 million, but they don't they don't see our actual utility costs. They don't they don't see the costs of maintaining even the current security software throughout all of our buildings or even maintaining the cameras and the storage for that. I mean, that could and
again, that could eat it all up. So, um, it would be nice if we had a running total of what our deficit is in these areas and what the what the capital levy amount is actually contributing to. And over time, obviously, like you just
said, last we're trying to keep ourselves solvent as long as possible, right? >> But that's what it is. It's a it's a it's we're still on a losing game. So trying to trying to impress upon the community um and the taxpayers
this money only can go so far and it can be eaten up in a heartbeat by any one of these categories. >> Yes, the capital project levy is not the answer. >> No, for it it is it's one enhancement to help us push things a little further along. Yep. But it is important that the
public understands it because the ballot language is such that it states facts and it can be confusing um for for for folks too. So we want to just try and help them understand it's it's not $38 million right up front.
It's $3.8 million on an annual basis depending upon what happens with the net tax capacity. If that were stable that's 3.8 million. If it goes up it's a little more. If it goes down, it's less. >> Thank you. >> Does the net text tax text tax text tax capacity ever go down though? I mean, to
be honest with you, I mean, >> um, we've had somewhere statewide, we've had that issue, right? You know, um, particularly when they have, um, various different changes in assessment valuations and such that can occur on a county or districts um county level,
right, that impact school districts. But um I I mean I'll be honest to be on to um to take a look at our net tax capacity. My anticipation is that there would be a a slight and slow increase. But I'm not certain that we would see
the increase that we saw in the last 10 years. >> Yeah. Because we all saw a huge increase. I can't remember it was three or four years ago when the city re-evaluated all the houses and everybody got upset about their tax statements. So yeah. >> Anyone else? Is this the money on this? Is this one
time? It's not onetime spend money because it can be used for salaries though. So it's not like fund balance money. It it's as long as it's used within these categories, >> right? It's an annual $3.8 million that generates revenue every year, >> right?
>> Um and it can be used on certain salaries, right? the only salaries that can really be used on are those that are techreated >> or teaching tech and other um so much of our curriculum comes to us now through e-learning like it it you have to be
able to know and understand how to how to instruct that too. So only certain positions within our district would be qualifying for this along with our technology department. So um you do see that's the bottom line there um with a portion of their of their salaries most of it.
>> Wow. That's what Selbin means. >> Sellbin salary benefits. Sorry, some of my shorting of words. Yep. >> I was about to ask that and now I feel a little silly. >> Anyone else? >> And I I would agree also like just
knowing that this is not final because like as our community goes on here and sees this, I think it's really important because there's things on here I fully support and there's things that I would not support. But that will be up ultimately up to the district to bring to the board, whoever's sitting at this table to vote for whether or not they support it or not.
>> Y but this is an indication of what are we thinking about, you know. So, um, you know, then I think it then it needs more work to be honest with you. >> Oh, certainly with more input from the board and from our community. And I think that there's some opportunities with our new superintendent coming on
board to possibly do some listening and learnings and all that type of stuff. Um because I that's part of crafting the the language of the levy. So >> it's kind of like the LTFM plan if you think of it that way. It's like every year you have to really fine-tune it and the next two years and make sure you're kind of on track.
>> Anyone else? >> Okay. Hearing none. Let's vote. All in favor say I. >> Can I Can I ask what we're voting for, please? Voting. >> Yes, please. We we the motion and second on the table is the capital levy pro capital project levy um to authorize
administration to prepare and just to repair the review and comment. Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. You good? >> Okay. All in favor language is presented. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. >> We are on we are on item M. Authorize
administration to prepare and submit review and comment to the Minnesota Department of Education as divine defined within the ballot language as presented. Okay. I want to get clarification though on something because on the agenda that's on our website right now. If you click agenda
there, it's different than what we're looking at in our board packet and it says under M, it says ballot language for November 3rd. The resolution calling the election will be on the July board agenda for board action. Yeah. So, there's there's there's a conf there's
conflicting um information on the two there's two different agendas basically and I wasn't sure what we're voting on tonight to be honest with you. >> If you go look on go look on our website, click agenda for which is the agenda our community would have access to >> and go under M.
>> So, not board book but correct not board book. >> Board book. >> What point? Uh for >> I have a copy I have a printed copy of it right here. The reason I noticed it is cuz I had a printed copy. >> It was this and then
>> 14 on the on the >> When did your copy get printed? Because sometimes they print it before it's finalized. >> Separate though. It's a separate >> like a Monday or Tuesday of >> last week. I'm not sure. >> Um >> 14mm. >> It's on there right now actually because
I can see it. It's not. >> It's not. >> So go plsas.org. I'm on it. >> And click agenda. >> I'm on it. >> Yep. It's >> right. >> So, we're on the website and 14M as I
read it off of the uh >> and it's highlighted in red. >> No. >> And it says ballot language for November 3rd, 2026. The resolution calling the election will be on the July board agenda for board action. So, under here where it says meeting schedules an agenda, Yeah.
>> click the word agenda. the word agenda. He's on it right now. I'm watching it. Yeah, it's it's the same as what >> right here. Click on the board meeting. You click for board packets. >> Not board packets. It's under the word agenda. >> Under the word agenda.
>> So when they submit the the preliminary agenda on the >> but that's what our that's what our community would see as an agenda. I'm just asking >> searched for it that way. Um >> well that's how that's how most >> I mean I had somebody today. So that the board packet wasn't
that board packet wasn't actually on the board packet. >> It's there now. >> I understand it's there. It's usually on there on Friday. Um so if you look under agenda, I'm not making stuff up, guys. >> No, I I know what you're talking about. And I think >> I'm just trying to get a clarification. It doesn't matter what happened. I'm trying to get clarification on what
we're voting on this evening. >> What we're voting on is authorizing administration to prepare and submit review and comment >> for this for this. Then what else are we voting on this evening regarding because the next the next item on the agenda is
>> language >> is the ballot language >> for the operating >> okay and that's where on the agenda it says that that will be on the July board agenda >> went into >> do you see it Dr. Thomas, there's a bunch of red highlights on there. >> I I'm sorry, Director Atinson. I'm not
seeing >> when I when I go to the school board and I click on school board meeting. >> No, you have to click on the word agenda. >> Yeah, I I know what she's talking about. And that's the preliminary agenda that's released the Monday before the scor uh school board meeting. That's subject to
change. >> Um it's just the outline, but it's no meat in it, nothing like that. And so as the agenda gets finalized, >> call a recess until we can get this figured out because I I think it we just need to get clarification on what we're voting on this evening. >> Are you making a motion for a recess?
>> Um yes, I'd like to make a motion for a recess. >> I don't think you have to make a motion for recess. >> Yeah, I don't think >> Yeah. Well, if you're not doing it calling it, then yes. >> But that's just the cheat sheet. Um I >> I know, but I need the cheat sheet. Um
so you want to make a motion for a recess? >> Yes. I just I want to get this figured out and I just I I'm happy to walk over and show you what it says on our website and I'd like to get clarification on what we're voting on this evening because >> our community if they're looking at the agenda. It says we're voting on this on
July on the July board agenda. Okay. Is there a second for the motion to recess? >> Second. >> Second by Director Johnson. All in favor to recess five minute recess and some say I I
>> I Okay, we can recess for five minutes and figure this out. So yeah, I just I just showed it to too. So, yeah. >> Um, and we've had it that way forever. Um, >> so the ballot language >> it's
>> it's not clear what it's only >> it wasn't on there separate initially. So, I wonder if maybe that you have So, we are going to be voting. >> Mics are on now. Mics are on. All right. Thank you. All right. We're going to
come back to the motion on the table, which is item number. Are we on 14? 14M. The capital project project levy authorize administration to prepare and submit review and comment to the Minnesota Department of Education as
divine defined within the ballot language as presented. We have a motion and a second on the table and we will now go to vote. All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Oppose say nay.
>> That passes 70. Thank you. Uh, next item. Uh, I will take a motion and a second for the next item, which is the ballot language for the ne November 3rd, 2026. Um, again, can I get a motion and a
second? Who made uh by Director Mason? >> Second >> and a second by Director Johnson. This is this recommendation is to place a 10-year operating levy as question one with contingent question two for a 10-year capital levy uh request on the
November 3rd ballot. Uh Dr. Thomas and Dr. Ryder. >> Thank you, Chair Bullan and um board director board directors. Um so this evening uh you you have ballot language that we've worked with our attorneys and
elders um to craft um as a sample um and there are some requirements that have to be in the language very specifically based upon how it's written. Uh what you are seeing tonight after a lot of discussion that we've had with uh you all as a board we've talked as an admin
team um in terms of where would that dollar threshold be. What you are seeing tonight is a recommendation um at the 30 the additional $32 a month um which totals um 1385.97 per pupil um
and that was in tab B I think in the budget this evening when or >> table table sorry table B in the budget >> and then um I and so so that's what you is reflected in the ballot language um I
know some folks were asking about, you know, the 32 versus the total. And this is the total that was from those tables that we've been talking about. Um, so with that, I will turn it to Director Ryder for additional con context and the conversations that we've had for
settings uh the ballot language for both the operating um as well as the capital levy. >> Thank you, Dr. Thomas. Um, so we have um two questions on this special election ballot. The first question being the
revoke and replace of our current referendum which is $623.97 uh replacing that and this question is written to a new authorization of 1 1385.97 and um then the um information in here also
talks about it being 10 years and it does say state in here that an increase each year by the rate of inflation beginning with taxes payable in 2028. There is no step up on this question. It is just that question. >> Any questions board members?
>> Dr. France, >> are we committing ourselves also to the rate that's in there at the $32 amount or is that still up for discussion? Just the language or just or the rate also? So, the confusion over the um calling of the election, that will not happen till
July. >> Okay. >> Tonight, we're hoping for action on the ballot language, which allows us then to continue on our communications plan regarding the levy as well as um the writing of the review and comment with regard to question number two. Okay. So,
what we would hope for is that um we would have an idea of what we're using on this this dollar amount in question one and that that's what we would be building our plan with and we would have that kind of solid from the board. If that action can't be made tonight, you
would need to do it when you call the election. You cannot do it after you call the election. You won't have Yeah. So, does that help? >> It does. Um but >> when is that? >> Sorry. Oh, sorry. When is that? What date is that? When you call the ele when we call
>> we have it on the July 13th meeting. >> Okay. Y >> but isn't it until August 11? I thought the remember the first >> that very well may be but >> remember there there was a graph and there was dates and I thought it was August 11th which I feel is like is late but given the fact that we're November
election >> going to allow for the the buildout of the campaign too as well. So our calendar shows a July approval. But you're right. There's a later date drop dead kind of. Yep. >> Yeah. That's why when I saw the date of July,
>> I think our board meeting in August is August 10th and I think the deadline is August 11th. >> That make I don't know. I don't have the calendar. >> So I think I think it was like just a day away and that's cutting it kind of close. >> Yeah. I mean my cons Oh, go ahead. We can make a motion then do after that.
>> We do have a motion and a second on on the table. >> I have another question. And I just want to be very very clear, >> the language is not the final um declaration we're going with the 32, the 46, or the 67. It's just the
language that will still be discussed um by the time you call the election. Like if you were to take action tonight on this ballot language to allow us to move forward with this stuff then and you changed your mind
about the amount, it would have to be done before you call the election. >> Am I making sense there >> in July? >> Yes. >> Yep. So we have tonight's meeting and we have July 13th meeting. So, we um I know
that there's been at our last meeting there was some dialogue about question one, question two, and exactly what those numbers are going to end up being, right? Can we do one without the other kind of thing and make a decision? The recommendation is you don't call the election to you have everything completely figured out and you know
where you're going with it. Does that make sense? So tonight, if we can decide on the question $1 amount, that's what we will run with tonight with question two ballot language also having a few little tweaks to it. If we can get that
decided, the review and comment will reflect what that says. Okay. Okay. So, with that in mind, I'd like to see it worked up with the $46 amount and not the 32. I feel that that's putting us way too close to the edge and we have
to go out right away, meaning we have to spend money on another election way too soon. So, I would like that to be considered as far as the the language in here or the workup that you did. Now, the rest of the language would be fine.
Just that dollar amount field >> that is the only thing in question one that you would have to change. That's yeah, >> you have to decide on the dollar amount you want showing there. >> And so the 1385.97
is reflective of the approximate $32 per month we talked about as a taxpayer impact to the average value home and would generate approximately $7 million in addition to what we currently receive of 5.7 mil. The amount of
well the other two amounts I pulled off from past slides that elders has provided to us. So, I mean, I have the dollar amounts in front of me that I could um speak to if there's questions about those >> point of information. Um I believe >> point of Say it again. Sorry. >> Information.
>> Oh, sure. I I didn't hear me if I'm wrong, but I believe at our last meeting we gave board consensus to just move forward with the $32. I think we would need board consensus to add additional need. >> Correct. >> So, we did have board consensus on the
$32. Um, and I what I'm hearing the district administration team asking for is action tonight on the amount the 32. So, director Fran.
>> Yeah, I'm sorry, Chair Bully, if I may say. It's it's the >> the 32 and the operating U levy as well. The language of both. >> The capital levy. >> Yeah, I'm sorry. The capital the capital levy. Thank you, Dre. The operating le levy and the capital levy combined.
>> The contingency piece. >> The contingency. Yep. Yep. And and and I'll just share if if I if I may in and you all have I'm not going to recant a lot of what we've discussed in our previous work sessions. But um you know the question was you know how do we find
that fine line of balance between what we actually believe would actually pass and we've had multiple discussions here at the table. um our team I can tell you right now that we leaned more for addressing um a higher operating levy um
uh threshold but as we had more conversation um we we leaned towards the 32 knowing that that's where we had those two dollar figures as a board where we were kind of straddling and um for us
um the 32 plus the capital actually allows us to do some work around um the supports of our schools. Um it is not ideal in terms of what we would want. Um we we we agree to uh Director France's point that
we are right on that edge. Um and we also know that we're right on the edge of whether it's going to pass or not. to not pass is much more consequential than to be on the edge with something that we have that we can begin to um get momentum and develop some proof concept
of a return on that investment to show what are we doing to enhance our schools. So, I just want to give the board that context of a little bit behind the scenes of some of our deliberations as a as a leadership team, what brought the recommendations um to you all tonight. Director France.
>> Um, we did do a community survey and they did go for the 46 or higher. We do have momentum with a lot of the people who have noticed the cuts and we've got a huge momentum from community groups,
realer groups in particular, who are afraid of a stagnant and volatile economic outlook and know how much the um the uh a lower an underfunded school district means to their to anybody's
ability to maintain their home values. Um so we have heard from a tremendous number of people to the board um saying that they support the 46 and if we get that momentum and we actually
do go out and we you know as as a board and and support our schools all of us then um I have every confidence that this would pass because we're actually asking for only $1 amount above where it was before but hopefully we won't have
the misinformation campaigns this time. >> Um, that's that's the hope because obviously there was I mean there's a lot of confusion. People really think that revenue is exceeding expenses. It is absolutely not. We're cutting expenses in order to balance the budget and we're
cutting them down to bare bones. So, um, that information needs to come out clear. Um my goodness, the support that came in just from cutting choir, you know, was was tremendous. As well as um the fact that when you look at the
graphs that a third party created, that shows us going out for another needed levy. If we have one change at the state with special education, we're in trouble. That operating levy won't help as much. So, we need to consider the full impact here and that we need to
prepare the community that we're going to have to go out for another levy with about in a year after this one passes based upon when we actually receive the money in order to keep above, you know, subsistence level. Director France, I think uh your
comments are are heard and um I you know one I think that when I I'm listening to you listening to all the feedback that we've had come into the board um and uh one of the things that is
what I've been thinking about a lot is um kind of along the same lines as uh you know in our superintendent search, how we've come together as a board on a candidate and the power that that has uh when when the the district is uh coming
forward with a recommendation of a recommendation that um has been talked about as being a floor level. Um but then with the second option offering with the capital levy the second question offering some um I you know
some additional funding later. Um I hear you in what you're saying and I think your comments are are valid and and many people are in line with them. I think that there's another aspect that we have
to pay attention to as a board. It is um in in all these conversations the people that are engaged in the district and they're in um you know engaged with what's going on. There is differing
opinions. There is the opinion that um you know like we've heard multiple times through community feedback. We've heard it, we heard it in open forum tonight that um you know we need to stabilize and strengthen and uh you know I think
that many of us would agree we need to do that. Uh I think that we have to come together as a board figuring what is the best way to do that because if this levy fails um there will be dire consequences for
that. And while the people that are engaged and and hearing and looking um there are definitely differing opinions on the amounts and that is just the reality that we're dealing with and it's
a reality in which us seven board members represent. And my ask to the board as we discuss this and then take a vote tonight um is uh how do we come together on the amount because the last
thing that we want to do is go forward arguing about um arguing about where the amount was. we want to go forward in that we want this levy to pass and we I think that there's power in us coming
into alignment as best as possible. One of the things that I've thought about personally as community feedback has come in is it's very hard to uh argue or or quibble over $14 per month in this
day and age. It's just hard given uh what education supports. It's hard to you know people are asking why 32 or you know what's the diff how can can we split the difference you know because every dollar does count. I think
that you know we have had a lot of conversations and the and the district Dr. Thomas and his team, the board is, you know, engaged in hearing from them, hearing from the community. The district staff themselves has too
been listening to the community. And um tonight the the motion before us is on the $32. If there is a um Okay, so we're going to go to Robert's rules. If there's a motion to
or to a motion to amend the motion that really has to come the board will have to you know we'll have to come together and decide and I would I would implore the board um to come to a conclusion that is more than a
split vote. I would just implore us to do that because the district can't in my singular opinion it would be dire if another levy didn't pass. So how you know again I don't know if I'm supposed to say that
that that but this it's my opinion and and I would I would um I would be remiss I in saying a a 43 vote is good here. I I think that we really, however we do
it, we need to come together to say um we we need to move together in in the interest of supporting our schools with this levy. And how as a board do we want to do it? I mean, a 43
will do it. A 43 will will, you know, it'll pass. Director Bolan. Um I'd just like to add um one of the things is, you know, if you look at the levy that we're currently working on with the um the proposed amount, the 32, and then you add the capital levy, it's it's almost
the same amount as what we had proposed last time, and that that failed. And the feedback from our community, they voiced their opinion. I don't recall the votes offhand how many people voted for against. I know there was a big difference. It was 55 55% to 44% or whatever. It was it was a big
difference. Um and that just tells us that we need to go back with a more affordable affordable vote or affordable amount. Um some of the feedback coming out of that out of that levy which I think is really valuable because it was what what did
the vote nos asked them specifically what was why did you vote no? We asked them very specifically. One of them was affordability. One was transparency of spend. And um I went I went past in the last couple days and have been watching the Morris Leatherman surveys that
they've been doing because this is a conversation many school districts are having and the number one factor of things that they're hearing at this moment in time Morris Leatherman is um a concern about high taxes and levies passing and the average dollar amount
regardless of the district. You can go anywhere from Robbinsdale all the way up to Cambridge Assanti to um I don't recall the third one I listened to, but um the average dollar amount that people would support was be between 10 and $20. And now that's that's not our district.
I understand that. But there was just some very common themes. Like I said, people are concerned with high taxes, affordability, and the amount of fraud in Minnesota. And then if there was if they were to support a dollar amount, it would be between that 10 and 20. So, um,
the other thing they actually listened listened, um, listed as well that I thought was very interesting is they said that for a successful levy campaign to pass, they have to have over 80% of the support from district parents. And when I look back at our survey that we did that was highly focused on district
parents, it was like 78%. So, it's close, but it's not quite that 80%. So, I feel very comfortable with this dollar amount. Um, knowing that we are the at the end of our 10-year renewal of our operating levy. Um, I'm supportive of
sending this to our community to decide. Um, but I do believe our district has some work to do to clearly articulate how the funds will be used to gain the support that's needed for it to pass. Um, so I I am supportive the the dollar amount. >> I just say one thing. Um, I don't agree
um with um Director Actinson's assessment of how the survey was interpreted and I think that's part of the confusion that we have. Um I also don't agree with the $10 to $20 amount and the fact that um all of our surrounding ditchers have passed levies
and they're all being funded at almost twice the rate that we are and we have higher home values here. Um, so, um, and and what I don't want to do in good conscience is spend the money, go for
the levy, and then have to turn around with the slightest change in our economic outlook. And we know that state and federal funding is on the cusp of leaving us, particularly with special ed. Um there's a high probability uh where the majority of this money could
be eaten up and we currently have a $5.8 million subsidy for nonf funding. So how do we in good conscience go out to them and say, "Please pass this. Oh, by the way, pass this too next year because we should have asked for more in one fell
swoop and just been honest about our current financial situation. Um, and quite frankly, we're trying to attract people to move in here in order to keep our home values high. That's really hard to do if we continue to underfund our
schools. >> Right. Well, and I think you made a good point. Um the board has to you know the the projections of of where we've headed have have been consistent uh over the
years even with the you know last levy attempt. The projections have remained consistent and we see the projections for um the different dollar amounts. we've seen them over the last months and years that where we would be with
certain levy amounts um and where our fund balance would be projected. And so as a board um you know we we are receiving the district's recommendation. Um,
but we also have to realize, like you said, Director France, that in a couple years, we could be in a space to ask again. And, um, that projection has been something that has been before us
for at least since I've been on the board. Um, uh, and that has remained consistent. uh and and there are all kinds of varying opinions and there always will be um you know I just I
believe wholeheartedly that as a board um coming together in um agreement as as best we can on the amount and also understanding what that amount means. The amount of 32 which is
recommended is it is also meaning that within you know a couple years we're going to be facing another reality. So are we comfortable as a board to understand that and and be willing to go
out and ask again? We've gone out and asked twice with two fails. Right. and the second fail. Traditionally, now we've never passed a learning levy before, but um we've never passed an a standalone ops levy. Uh but with every
other building levy we've asked, the second one has passed overwhelmingly after un unfortunately after you have to we deal with the consequences. And that has been the history in this district for the past 30 years that you go out once it doesn't work. Buildings get
overcrowded, things get cut, parents get upset, and all of a sudden parents come out in full force, community comes out in full force, grandparents come out in full force to push as to get as much as they can uh simply because they they don't want to see their schools, their
community, and their kids uh be hurt. So, we do have that going for us uh quite a bit. >> Cher I'm sorry. >> Well, let's hear from someone we haven't heard from, please. Um, thank you. Um, I I I will vote yes no matter the amount
because we need a levy. Um, so I am a yes for for anything we have before us. Um, based on our survey, admittedly it wasn't a huge turnout for the survey. I wish more people would have taken it.
Um, but it was a pretty overwhelming, you know, look at the results of our survey. We have a lot of feedback. We've all had different conversations. We want community feedback and I I want to say thank you to the people who have provided feedback. No matter what the feedback is, that's really appreciated.
We need to hear we need to hear that. Um, you know, I've said it before, we have to think long term. Even one of our superintendent candidates said, you know, thank your future self. Do something that that you can thank your future self. And I want to thank my
future self. I want to thank our future selves. um here at the table. Um you know, and I'm saying this out of unity. I'm saying this out of, you know, nothing but respect for the entire process. I don't want our community to come back to us in two to three years
and say, you know, why didn't you fight for this? Well, this is this is my effort to fight for this. This is my effort to fight for our kids. I don't like sitting on the floor. I don't I would never invite any of us to sit on the floor. I don't want our community to sit on the floor. I want to offer a
chair and I would like to um make a motion to move the number up on the average to 46, replace the 1385 with 1741. And I'm saying this out of unity. I'd really like to offer our community a
chair. Um and so I hope I I really urge my my colleagues to support that and hope I can get a second on that. >> Second. >> Okay. So there is this is my this is my strong suit is this. So there is a
motion and a second um to amend the motion. Is that correct? Is that how to say it? >> Okay. >> The current motion >> that replaces Yeah. The 1385 with 1741 >> with 174. Is there sense? It would be
1740.97. >> 1740.97. Let's give it another three cents. Okay. So, there was a a motion and a second. All in favor? >> Oh, what do I have? >> Discussion. >> Oh, sorry. Discussion.
>> I um I am in favor of leaving as is and um after our last meeting, I know we've had a lot of discussion over several months. um felt comfortable discussing with Dr. Thomas and the administration. Thank you for that feedback at the table to um you know I I would just like to
say also thank you to the community for feedback. I appreciate it. Um, I certainly um hear both sides of the argument and um for me it's I feel like this is a this is um accommodating both sides of that where it gives this option
of the $32 to our community and then also asks for additional money with the capital on top of that to support. So at the end of the day it's more than the $46. It's $47 and could grow with net tax capacity. So, you know, when we talk
about the $46 a month graph, like we're actually doing more than that, right? So, with these combined um and so it's not a couple of years we would be back at it. It's, you know, two through 2031 I think is the last graph. So, or close
to it. Um so, we're going out several years. Obviously, any forecast there's many unknowns, things change, enrollment changes. Nobody can predict this. we we saw with the last 10-year enrollment um and how far we were off. So, um I feel comfortable with this amount. I I would
be >> I would love to have more money. I would not feel comfortable going to the ballot with more than $32. Um because I um it would be detrimental if it didn't pass and I do not have confidence based on constituent feedback that that it would
pass. Um, and we've really struggled to get out to the non-parent, non-involved community. Um, and and that's who who needs to support this. Um, and I don't, you know, hearing that feedback, you
know, I just I don't think we'll get the support we need at the 46 um based on what I've heard and survey feedback and everything else in past um, levies. So, I'm comfortable with 32. I'm not comfortable going above that. um again with the capital um which allows us to
actually be at 47 plus going up. >> Anybody else? >> Were you raising >> Dr. Johnson? >> Okay, >> so excuse me. Um, so yes, uh, the capital, this amount
with the capital, uh, projects levy might give us security. Um, we just heard from one of our public speakers tonight cautioning us against uh, using that amount and saying that it
will grow or that um, because we don't know that, right? Um, and there are all sorts of things that can happen between now and the future which can dramatically affect
what are able what our district is able to do with the money and how much time this is going to buy us. We've already referenced the special education cuts numerous times. Um and if this is again a question of uh cross subsidy um
spending like that is just that's going to eat away at this money and it doesn't buy us the security that we think it is buying us right now. I there is a a part of this where you
become what you tolerate and I firmly believe that our best days as a district are not behind us. Um in our in my conversations with Dr. Thomas as well, I've heard um I have him heard him
talk about the $32 amount and that yes, it we wish it were more. Um but we think that we are turning this district around and we are turning it in the right direction and um if we need to go back to voters in a
couple of years and demonstrate the progress that we've been able to make and say look what the bare minimum got you. It's a good cell, right? But I I really I strongly believe that we
can get there faster if we choose to invest in it. And we heard again earlier tonight during public comment that schools have seen revenues increase without correlating to student success. And that's technically true. Uh though
as we have talked about in other contexts that's only a piece of the story. It's only one piece of data. The reality is some of this funding has increased and it is tied to categorical aid. There's been unfunded mandates
um that has eaten into some of this revenue. And while it is true that this revenue signifies an investment in public education, it does not represent an increase in funding from this community. It is not an increase in
funding from us as a collective. It is money um from outside this district. And it was stated that the community wants a levy that is transparent, that is disciplined, and something they can trust. And I believe that's what Dr.
Thomas and his team have given us. Of all the options, the $32 amount is the only one that does not give us any investment opportunities. They've been transparent that if we truly want to make investments to
improve student outcomes, lower class sizes, $46 is the starting point. Not with the capital projects levy. Not 32 with the capital projects levy. $46 in an operating levy.
Last week we talked about trust as it relates to the hiring of a superintendent. And I'm wondering for those who wanted a three-year contract, why are we so ready and willing to invest in someone we don't know versus the people who are in
our district right now? We identified a superintendent candidate that discussed raising test scores on and focusing on data and instruction to improve student outcomes. And I truly truly meant it what I said last week when I said that during
deliberation whoever is in that chair has my full support in assisting them in achieving the goals of our district. So again I ask why are we shortch changing that individual and not investing in in the in the district to make sure that
they can be successful. Let's give them a shot. We wanted it to be three years. Let's give them the opportunity to make it three years. Let's give them something to work with, not the bare minimum. And I know there's hesitation.
I know it because the last levy amount was similar. And we don't want to see this fail. But if we get behind this, if we go with that theme of unity, and if we get behind a $46 amount, and it does end up failing at the at the
ballot box, it will be devastating. But we will lose together if we unite behind this. And I know there will be a laundry list of reasons not to vote for 46. And I would ask us again to rely on the
district and their analysis. Lowering class sizes has far and away been the number one issue and $46 is the only amount that addresses that. And a few weeks ago,
because of community feedback, there were programs that were on the chopping block that were the budget was altered to uh do what we could to save and spare those those programs.
That same night, ironically, we were all given this medallion from the choir. And if we don't vote for 46 tonight, then I'm just going to hand this back to the district because we don't deserve it. Because it is only a matter of time
before we have to look that choir department in the face or Spanish immersion in the face and we have to look at them and say, "Sorry, tough decisions have to be made." And I only I hope that we have the conviction to make them at the time because we have the
opportunity right now. right now to change that outcome. We can I during the la during the the the discussion around pairing back those programs
constantly heard, "God, I wish this wasn't the way. Gosh, I wish this was I wish there was some other option." We have another option right now in front of us. So, I am just going to hold on to this. I'm going to hope that I don't have to
give it back, but if I do, then I will gladly part with it because like I said, I don't think we deserve it. >> Anyone else? Director Johnson? >> Yeah, I appreciate everything everyone everyone said and I agree. Everyone
wants a higher dollar amount and at least for myself, um we're not the only district facing this, right? You know, we've got 300 plus school districts in the state and a funding formula that was created
in 19 >> 71 >> 71. There are problems that we are attempting to solve that are obviously, you know, that that need to be done at a much higher level than what
we sit here. And um my goal is to be able to bring something to the ballot box that's going to pass and I think that's the $32 amount and I will leave that at that. So thank you.
>> Anyone else? >> Oh, can I get a point of information? Sorry. >> Sure. >> Point of information. Director France stated several times, this is the second time at the table that we've never passed an operating levy. Just for my own knowledge, because I my understanding is this was an operating
levy that passed in um 2017 and that's what we're this is the end of the tenure renewal of that. Correct. >> Um I wasn't here then. >> Okay. >> But my recollection is that was probably true, but I think it was also at the same time as a bond.
Well, there was a bond for 100 >> combine with her bond. It was not a learning levy. It was an operating levy to pay for the uh long-term facilities, maintenance facilities, staff, etc., and the utilities to keep the new space and the new buildings open. None of that
money went back to um improving educational programs into any of our learning. It was and it was and it was low because it was based on an overestimated um um enrollment um projection that then
caused us to actually go into our uh five going on six-year um rate of cutting because we were not getting enough money in. >> So I appreciate it's still an operating levy though and if you go back on our website it's exactly what it says. So,
I'm just clarifying. We don't have >> I just want to make sure it's important because the other thing that is important to note is that if this doesn't pass, we as a board are going to be faced with an even harder decision. >> The state law allows this board, which we could do this here tonight. I could make a motion. We could scrap all of
this and we could renew our current levy, which I think is a disastrous idea because I think it's a bad levy. It's a low amount. It has no inflationary factor. But at that moment in time when there was that $und00 million bond that our school district was trying to pass, they knew, and I've talked to previous
board directors, they knew they had to bring an affordable levy to our community. It actually was 9 something at the time. It's listed as 9 something on the ballot if people go back and look at it. So, I do not want to be sitting here knowing that as a board director,
I'm going to take those voting rights away from our constituents and pass or um autorenew a levy, which is many districts are doing that right now. You can go back and just see the list of the districts who are doing that. So, it's it's a tough time to be in the levy levy business right now for school districts.
So, I I I just want to clarify that. And again, I support the amount that the district is proposing. We're also just adding something that our community hasn't seen in at least in the previous levy or in the one that was passed, right? The inflationary factor which we
saw how much it would have changed, right? So again, that's another factor for me, right? The $32 just makes sense because it also has the inflationary factor. So, >> um, >> Director France, >> so I I I like what Director Smith said.
you you become what you tolerate because the in the 2017 the board was reluctant to pass the inflationary number because they were afraid the community wouldn't pass that. So they took it out knowing it was going to lead us into debt sooner
than later. Um I personally don't want to be on this board and have to go through next year discussing another levy and greater cuts. And that's exactly what's going to happen because then we would go out for a levy the year after that and then not receive it. But
we are the $32 um will put us in statutory oper will save us one year statutory operating debt. And then if and and statistically speaking, the second option on the levy as well as the trust fund and everything
else that's going to go onto this next ballot makes the capital levy that much harder actually to pass. So, um I don't think it's even wise of us to depend on both of those. Um those are two
additional actions on top of everything else that's going to be on the midterm ballot. So, we actually lose our choices. As far as other districts being the same spot, yeah, they are, but those districts that renewed their levy
renewed them at way higher rate weight uh rate than what we're even trying to get through. So we are still even after this we will still be the lowest or second to the lowest funded district in our conference in that west metro that
we compare ourselves against. So if people want to make academics their top priority then you invest in it. Period. That is the way. And again we become what we tolerate. And if we're
going to tolerate what happened in the last election and the comments about overrun administration rates and and and all this stuff, uh yeah, we get more revenue every year, but our expenses actually go up farther than the revenue
does. And the Ellers's report that the entire state uses shows that it has never ever gone over. Um unfortunately, it's been equal a couple years, but has never gone on over. So, we we need to understand, are we going to just
tolerate still doing the minimum, exhausting our staff, having good staff leave before retirement age because they can't stand teaching anymore because the stress is so high, the resources are so low, and then still beat up our leadership because test stores don't go
up. I mean, you know, what are you doing? Again, I go back to the analogy, you're telling a starving man to eat less and oh, by the way, produce more work. It doesn't work that way. If you want something in any way, shape, or form, you invest in it. And we're not
asking for a lot. $14, as you said, chair bullion, is not a lot. And the majority of houses actually, especially with economic downturns and what we're seeing with the real estate market right now, probably will not pay that because that's for 550 and over, I believe, for
home values. >> 525. So with that, yeah, we we and and even even people with with real estate on that side by the time they get done with the valuation don't necessarily pay even
the 45 or the 46. So we have to take that into consideration. And what are we going to tolerate? Are we going to tolerate still sitting on the bottom rung of every ladder? We have an excellent district where our teachers have gone above and beyond to with less
and less resources and larger class sizes and they're still holding they're still treading water and they're going to drown and we're giving them the minimum to keep treading water and then we're going to go under. And if we think we're going to pass another levy with
the way that our economic outlook is looking for the United States right now, I I don't think that's going to happen. So, and and by the way, the community should be mad because it costs a lot of money to put on these elections. So, are we being fiscally responsible by having
more and more elections and then each time telling them just give us a little bit more just to just to keep above, you know, basically um dying of starvation. That's not it's not fair to people. People don't operate that in the operate like that in their
regular lives. So, we shouldn't be tolerating and we shouldn't and we should all come together and fight for our schools. You know, we have a strong say no campaign that a lot of people participated in, but they also did it uh to be fair with
false numbers, false graphs. We have a third party Ellers coming in and showing us these graphs. Okay, we didn't just make them up. Um the financial numbers can be explained. We just need to go out there and work for this. And I believe this district is worth fighting for. And
if we all come together and work for it, it it's amazing what we can accomplish and how far we can get if we actually don't tolerate the minimum. I have a clarifying question. Um so thank you board members for all of the input and
and like other board members have said the community input. Um my clarifying question either Dr. Thomas or Dr. Ryder. I'm looking at the I'm looking at the graph that you have been sharing with the community with the board for a long
time and my clarifying question is is this graph depicted dep depicting both the um uh operating levy and the
capital levy combined or is it just the operating? So, this line drive here that we've created um is incorporating just the operating uh levy. This does not I'm pointing up there thinking it was up there. It does not this does not have um
the capital levy consideration. >> So, my question I don't know if it's available to the board right now. I'm hoping that it is with the second on the the amended motion on the table that we are figuring out. But my question is
where does that move that needle? So the graph that we're looking at here with just the operating levy, it shows that we will would be falling under that baseline in the 2829 school year. And I
want to know where that line goes with the added capital levy ask. As has been pointed out, dollar-wise, the capital projects levy will generate a little more than the difference
between the 32 and the 46. >> Okay. So, it puts us to the 20 >> puts me on the 2030 2031. >> Um, >> right at >> as far as total dollar amount. >> Yes. >> Okay.
the capital statute is what we must follow for the capital projects levy. So that's where the instructional um usage of the capital projects levy to
make room for instructional would be a a method a tool we would have to use to truly see that capital projects levy be used to the benefit of the classroom. Yep. I understand because Yep. >> Yeah. So, so yeah, I I Yeah. So, we
would essentially this is an enhancement to the operating levy that we would only be able to use capital stat statute approved capital expenditures for that capital levy, which then frees up some of our um general fund that we're paying capital costs that allows us to make
those enhancements into the classrooms. And to your question, this gives us roughly about uh $3.8 8 million more a year. Um so the the question and and I don't want to speculate this is
something we can come back to the board is if we were able to offset the um uh general operating uh fund uh director writer with the
capital levy with that freed up dollar how does that extend the life of this bar graph? Are we at uh end of fiscal 30 >> about fiscal 30 is where I'm is if from our conversations that that would extend
now to one of our community members points um and not that it would be drastically much more but as valuations go up um there could be a little bit of extension but probably nothing that's going to bring us up to an entire fiscal
year. >> Valuations are already starting to drop. >> Yeah. So, so if I'm saying if they go up. Yeah, >> that's >> Thank you for clarifying that. So, there's an amended there's an amend
amendment to the motion made by uh a first and a sec. Second, and now I have to find out if that if we're approving that amended motion. So, all in favor of the amended, >> do a roll call vote, please. >> Yep, I will do that. All in favor of the
amended uh motion. Uh I will do a roll call vote. >> Director Smith, I'll start with you. >> I. >> Uh Director France. >> I. >> Director Olstead.
>> I. >> Director Mason. >> Nay. >> Director Johnson. >> Nay. Director Atinson. >> Nay. And I am an I.
Uh so that amended motion passes for three. And so um now the motion standing on the table is um recommending
the Let me get back to it. I can do this. >> Didn't we just didn't it pass with the amend? We passed it. We just passed it with the amended. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Oh my gosh. The Robert's rules. Okay. Thank you. That motion passes four to
three. So, moving on to the next agenda item. >> Um, if I may, question two has to be addressed. Jud. Oh, >> okay. Listen to me. Why would you listen to me? >> It's all good. Okay. So, um
I'm on um it's all part of it because it's the ballot. >> Mhm. >> Are we still on N? >> Yes, it's all part of one motion. >> I thought it was all part of one motion. We voted on the whole ballot and the language and changing the one piece of that. >> Okay. So, I mean,
>> so we just approved the 1740 97 and we approved the capital levy. is if it's >> written the ballot language. >> The ballot language. >> Okay, >> that's what this agenda item >> and utility service costs included. >> Yes.
>> Okay, I my apologies. Thank you. >> Okay, thank you. We all confuse each other. Okay, moving on to policy. Okay, tonight we have one policy on on the
agenda and that is policy number 621.1. It has been reviewed and read prior to this. So this is uh second reading and final action. I will take a motion and a second. >> So made >> by director Johnson. >> Second
>> by director Smith. Um is there any director if you want to have a discussion. >> Director, do you have anything to share? Director C. >> Attached into and Dr. Beasik is here as well too if he uh wants to speak on it or not. But attached in the board was
the uh chart and I had asked uh principal Bezac to add uh the question was on from the honors standpoint to um consider weighing those um and he did um add that into the chart as well as what the what our surrounding districts um
are doing um in regards to honors. And as you can see on the chart, as of this point in time, currently no other district around the area is uh waiting uh the honors classes. >> Any discussion or questions?
Hearing none, uh we'll take take a vote. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppos say nay. >> That passes 70. Next up is administrative reports. Um, and are there any administrative reports at this
time? >> Thank you, cheer boy and directors. I just wanted to quickly uh I know in some of the past board meetings we've talked about you know the uh the unfortunate nature of how school districts um staff and we've gone through that process and
uh it's never easy and it's been noted but one of the things I believe um one of the directors I believe is director Atinson had asked of me is that as we are moving through this process to kind of keep the board updated on where we're at with some of that and I know one of the times we there was that long list of
unfortunate non-renewals and then some of our ULAS's um and as of right now uh coming into this board meeting uh we have either been able to rehire or recall 15 of those individuals um back from that list. So a little bit more
than a third of that list um of our non-renews or ULAS have either currently been recalled um or um rehired simply due to whether you know maybe another staff member resigned or retirements or other kinds of things like that. So, I just wanted to provide that information
back to the board. Um, like I said, the the cycle of how school district staff is never enjoyable. Um, but these are kind of the eb and flows that you go through when you have to bring um staff back from either recalling them from their unrequested leave or from their non-renewal. So, I just wanted to
provide that update. >> Thank you. >> 15. >> Yep. 50. Thank you. >> Awesome. >> Any other administrative reports? Yes. >> Hearing none, we will move on to board
reports. Um, Director Atinson, would you like to start? >> Um, nothing. Um, okay. Director Johnson, >> thanks to everyone for a fantastic graduation. It >> was great. Great call on moving it forward an hour. So, Dr. Bezek, whatever
you had at play in that, uh, good job. Um yeah, it's been a busy few weeks. So um you know, just wanted to, you know, comment obviously the SI negotiations and progress and um was grateful to attend the Twin Oaks All-Star breakfast,
um celebrating Laker Treats of Students for Accountable, respectful, and safe behavior. Um just a fantastic event. So kudos to um the staff for putting that together for those students and parents and families. Um, also just, you know, handing out your
books and graduation and all the fun things in the school that that we've been doing over the last couple weeks has been great and end of year celebration last Friday um was great for the staff and congratulations to all of those educators. Um, and then I it's
been a while now, but May I sent out the May 12th um finance and ops meeting note as well as seek. So, I'll just highlight a couple of things on those. um finance and operations. We obviously went through the same levy and Eller's presentation. Um maybe just of note is
just the community feedback that sort of came out of there was just around uh really stressing the need for clear and transparent communication on the levy um and concerns about voter confusion and with the multiple questions and then um lack of you know third party local
media, the newspaper and of course all those things highlighted. So, uh, a lot of the same feedback, but I think important to note. Um, and then, um, talked about the transportation updates. Um, I think that was the gist of it. So, and then the seek meeting also sent
those notes out to the board, but um, I would say largely focused on the transition programming and, um, and the Laker launch is what it's named after the students selected. Uh, the enrollment is higher than expected. Um, talked a lot about what that that program will offer to our students. So
it's fantastic. Um talked a little bit about summer programming and extended school year, the growth in special education. So I think worth highlighting for our district who is just, you know, 10% growth overall and I believe it was about 60% growth um in centerbased
services which is um you know huge numbers that we're we're having to support those students. Um so um yeah, we talked about staffing and funding updates and then just legislative updates also for seek um and unified of course too and some of the
opportunities that have um come with unified programming this year. So um there's a lot more there. I'll let you board members read through that. Um and then just uh finally wanted to publicly say uh thank you to Dr. Thomas for for your service to our district and um for
your leadership and dedication and um you know I've enjoyed and it's been a pleasure kind of learning from you over the last year and a half and and working with you. So thank you >> Director Olstead. >> Yes. Um wonderful graduation. It's
amazing um what can be pulled off. Um and thank you um Principal Biz and and the entire team uh for that well well-run ship. Um, and congratulations to our national speech champs
um, national champions uh, in duo. So, Chloe and Jaden um, got that. So, that was really really cool to see. Um, so congratulations to them and um, I echo uh, finally my appreciation um, and
admiration for you, Dr. Thomas. Um, I'll miss our Texas pecan coffee dates because that's the coffee that you can taste. Um, and I appreciate that. And, um, you have a
heart for kids that is unmatched. >> Um, and Hopkins is very lucky to have you and you're just a gem of a human being. Um, so thank you for everything. >> Director France. Um well the last week of school was incredibly busy. Minaps
was phenomenal as usual. Um we had not only Shark Tank but uh end of year presentations and um it just every year it just gets better. And what those teachers do even though and the leaders of that program even though they've had
staff cut um and the program grew has just been nothing less than heroic. Um, I'm I've been very appreciative over the past 10 11 years uh to mentor, sponsor, and jug Shark Tank every year. Uh, and like I said, it's just um the kids are
great. Um, the opportunities are great. It's it's it's a phenomenal program. I also had the opportunity to visit several schools uh on their last day in the last week. Of course, emotions are mixed, but I want to have a special call out to Westwood. Um,
despite everything that was going on, I have never walked into a more fun building on a last day than I've ever seen. I They had bubble machines. They had outdoor science experiments. They were going and seeing the rock garden. And I realized that I actually have an adopted son at Westwood, too, which is
kind of a private uh uh hilarious little story. Um, so um which was a joke from one of the kids. Um but uh that was that was wonderful. Um everybody was doing so well with everything as far as scale.
Our last meeting we had a thorough review of the watershed. Uh a lot of work no one knows that our county does and the impact that is going that is going to have to do with less federal funding uh to help our our clean water product uh projects. Uh and then as a
reminder, Scales is inviting uh all the finance directors, I believe in September now, uh to have a panel discussion for our county leaders on school finances, the impact and the need to change that 1971 formula. Um and also
a large part of the discussion in the agenda was about that 10% increase in sped in our district and a 60% growth in the um in the um in the uh life skills because that is one of the areas where our biggest uh money goes uh as far as
the underfunded portion. Um and that is uh something that of course the state is has a high probability of cutting even more funding for that leaving all districts in uh in an upside down um cross subsidy that just gets worse.
Teaching and learning was done for the year. It didn't meet. It won't meet again until I believe September. Um and then a special thank you to Dr. Thomas Hopkins is incredibly lucky to have you. Um, and uh, I thank you for your
service, your tenacity, uh, your steadfast demeanor, and um, your ability to stay the course regardless of what's going on around you. It's quite impressive. And um, I um I just um wish you would stay, but uh,
you're not. So um, um, I just know that Hopkins is very, very lucky to have you. So, thank you very much. And a final call out to the incredible security and decision-making that happened at our um graduation. Um
somebody did point out the drones to me and the um and the uh as we were walking up the um the extra camera services, uh everything that was going on. And and the fact that we started doing this before there was an incident is
incredible because now we're making it the norm. And that's really important for the safety of our community and our students and the work that went into that and the last minute weather uh decision which was a lifesaver. Um
that's just an example of the incredible uh staff that uh Dr. Thomas has led and developed and hired uh in his in his uh time here in his tenure here. So uh shout out to all of that. That was absolutely incredible. Thank you,
>> Dr. Smith. >> Yeah. Um there were some Yeah. Um Director Mason uh from Finance and Operations Committee and um special education advisory committee. So um she already covered those so I'll I'll I'll
skip that. Um, you know, uh, you know, speaking of, uh, success in in, uh, arts, activities, and and athletics, uh, congratulations to the baseball team, um, for making the state tournament, I believe. Is it
Thursday at 4:30? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thursday at 4:30. So, um, best of luck to the to the Lakers and, um, and their continued success, but that was, uh, that was really great news to to get on Did we get that on graduation day? I
think we got that on graduation day. Yeah. All right. So, >> um speaking of graduation, um this has just been uh in incredible. Um as somebody who was not aware of the uh the
honor that we would get to to hand out diplomas to graduating students, um that was really awesome. It was quite something. Um, I also attended the Bridges graduation uh ceremony and uh and dinner and that
was phenomenal for for a lot of different reasons and um you know credit to um Dr. Brown and and and his staff for for putting on such an amazing event and recognizing those students because it was um it was really heartwarming. Um
and I commented to director Ols Olstead uh at the end of graduation like this is why we do it right like that was um it was it was incredible and then the end of year celebration
um getting to participate in that or at least attend um and see the recognition for our teachers and our staff and the things that they're doing every day. Um it was it was just it's such a wonderful
end to the year. Um and if this is all she wrote for me for for my service on the board, then that made it all worth it. So, um I will also uh who also by the way uh
the district leadership award uh the recipient of that is sitting right here as well. Um and uh Dr. Thomas, I don't even know where
to start. I know um when I made my first public comment and you were the one that contacted me, I felt like I was talking to a rock star. Like it was um it was just it was you are a
phenomenal human being and I am it's been the honor of a lifetime to be able to work with you these past couple of months. Um, and Hopkins is incredibly lucky. Um, but, uh, we've been lucky for the last
couple of years because you've been in our district and you've been our leader. And I'm not um I have not forgotten that uh you know, Chair White at the end of his term uh remarked that um he had
worked with a number of superintendants and uh by far you were the best and that we had the right person in the right chair at the right time. And I just wish it was a little longer,
but he was right. He was absolutely right. Um, and Dr. Anderson, don't think I've forgotten about you either. Uh, you have made quite a mark on this district in your, uh, short time here. And I know
that there are a number of individuals that have been, myself included, um, that have been, uh, wowed by your by your work and and your your ability to build capacity. Um, so again, same, uh, Northfield is
incredibly lucky. Congratulations to you and and thank you for all you've done for the district. Really appreciate it. >> I'd like to second that. I'm sorry I for left you out. Um, but >> he's over there just thinking, "Oh, >> yeah. He's very quiet, but he's very impactful." >> Yes. >> And our district is also suffering a
great loss. Um, you were phenomenal in the year that you were here. Thank you. Well, luckily I get to end with um that same sentiment is just of one of
gratitude um for you Dr. Thomas and your leadership. I shared it before I shared it at the end of your celebration. It has been such a great honor to to um learn from you, lead with you, lead
aside you, just all of the things. It has been an honor. Uh, Dr. Anderson, I would say the same. You are not my one employee, so I didn't have as much time with you, but from the very first time
that I met you, um, it was like I'd known you forever. And um one thing that is so telling is when unsolicited positive um accolades come. Uh and the amount of
accolades that have come unsolicited from not only staff but community members um students who have interacted with you both. um that just says so much
and I know that neither of you are in it for the accolades and that's what makes it even more special. Uh so I just uh want to say thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you and best wishes to to all the next um and that extends to the to
all of our staff. I mean um it's hard to just say thank you to certain people um but Dr. Lee Dr. Thomas, your leadership um has really been um impactful to the entire organization from uh the board
table all the way down into the classroom. Uh it's kind of like the our strategic plan. We wanted it to be living and breathing and and and reach down into even into households and it has done that and that's thanks to you. So um
uh that was my board report. Um and we will move to future events which is there is a special meeting on June 15th. Negotiations are underway as director Mason shared. Um and so the special meeting uh on June 15th will hopefully
um uh solidify our next superintendent. Um and then we have our next school board meeting which is July 13th. Um, enjoy the summer. Re rejuvenate and re hopeful that hope I hope that everyone
is rejuvenated and gets rest, enjoys the summer. Um, but board still has a lot of work to do and uh and we're going to do that. So, with that, I will take a motion to adjourn. >> So, made and a second
by Director Mason. Um, all in favor say I. I. oppose. Say nay. >> Nay. >> And we are >> You're really We get to hold on to them for a little while. >> Okay. Okay. We are adjourned. That was a 61. >> Okay.
>> I couldn't. >> Thank you. >> I'd like to say a lot more, but good stuff. >> I just wanted to say thank you. 9:00.